2022
DOI: 10.1029/2021ms002892
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Representing Cloud Mesoscale Variability in Superparameterized Climate Models

Abstract: In atmospheric modeling, superparameterization (SP) has gained popularity as a technique to improve cloud and convection representations in large‐scale models by coupling them locally to cloud‐resolving models. We show how the different representations of cloud water in the local and the global models in SP lead to a suppression of cloud advection and ultimately to a systematic underrepresentation of the cloud amount in the large‐scale model. We demonstrate this phenomenon in a regional SP experiment with the … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
2
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar issues have recently been reported by Jansson et al. (2022) in a superparameterization setup. A setup where LES is coupled to the host model at the lateral boundaries might solve these issues, as this can result in the advection of spatial variability in for example, temperature or humidity into the LES domain.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similar issues have recently been reported by Jansson et al. (2022) in a superparameterization setup. A setup where LES is coupled to the host model at the lateral boundaries might solve these issues, as this can result in the advection of spatial variability in for example, temperature or humidity into the LES domain.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…And if the cloud deck in the host model consists of broken clouds, the relative humidity in LES will likely stay below 100%, and LES will not capture any clouds. Similar issues have recently been reported by Jansson et al (2022) in a superparameterization setup. A setup where LES is coupled to the host model at the lateral boundaries might solve these issues, as this can result in the advection of spatial variability in for example, temperature or humidity into the LES domain.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…For over 5 years since the first experiments with HR MMF, it has been unclear whether a chronic over‐entrainment bias preventing realistic amounts of Sc liquid water was surmountable. It has been natural to wonder if the inherent idealizations of MMFs that make them computationally attractive—that is, the limited domain size, dimensionality, moderate (200‐m) interior horizontal resolution, lateral periodicity, and associated inability to laterally advect liquid water conservatively—(Jansson et al., 2022; Muller & Held, 2012)—might impose fundamental limitations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The overall impact is to under‐predict daytime cloud liquid water resulting in too little time mean shortwave reflectivity. Meanwhile, the assumptions inherent in an MMF that can limit its ability to laterally advect condensed water between adjacent CRMs have caused some to question its capacity to maintain low clouds (Jansson et al., 2022). While the scale separation inherent in the MMF also introduces distortions (such as the neglect of the mesoscale), it does allow a global model to simulate these fine scales, making it possible to represent physical processes (e.g., cloud top entrainment, aerosol activation in updrafts) that drive critical sensitivities of low clouds to anthropogenic influence.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As an aid to navigating the ensemble, we have prepared a web page with a set of plots and animations for each member. This page and the images and animations can be downloaded and used offline (Jansson, Janssens, Grönqvist, Siebesma, et al., 2023).…”
Section: Data Set Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%