No abstract

A large number of urban surface energy balance models now exist with different assumptions about the important features of the surface and exchange processes that need to be incorporated. To date, no comparison of these models has been conducted; in

Urban land surface schemes have been developed to model the distinct features of the urban surface and the associated energy exchange processes. These models have been developed for a range of purposes and make different assumptions related to the inclusion and representation of the relevant processes. Here, the first results of Phase 2 from an international comparison project to evaluate 32 urban land surface schemes are presented. This is the first large-scale systematic evaluation of these models. In four stages, participants were given increasingly detailed information about an urban site for which urban fluxes were directly observed. At each stage, each group returned their models' calculated surface energy balance fluxes. Wide variations are evident in the performance of the models for individual fluxes. No individual model performs best for all fluxes. Providing additional information about the surface generally results in better performance. However, there is clear evidence that poor choice of parameter values can cause a large drop in performance for models that otherwise perform well. As many models do not perform well across all fluxes, there is need for caution in their application, and users should be aware of the implications for applications and decision making.

The role of net heat storage Q S and anthropogenic heat Q F are considered in the surface energy balance for a downtown area in Łódź, Poland, for a 2 year period. Eddy covariance measurements provide estimates of the turbulent heat fluxes and radiometric measurements of the net all-wave radiation. A method to determine Q S based on representative surface temperature sampling is employed and compared with results from two other models. Results show that Q S is an important flux on the scale of hours to days and that it can be more than 10 W m −2 , on average, for periods of a week or more. By incorporating Q S estimates over hourly intervals, Q F was then determined as the residual of the energy balance. Using the approach, Q F averaged 32 W m −2 from October to March (60% of available energy), and −3 W m −2 from June to August. The physically unrealistic negative values for the summer period may suggest underestimation of turbulent fluxes, but no causal factor was identified. Although energy balance closure was close to 100% throughout the year, there was weaker agreement in the winter. This is attributed to errors in estimates of Q S and variation in Q F . Results highlight the need for future investigations of the urban surface energy balance to incorporate more complete measurements and estimates of Q S .

No abstract