The us clivar drought working group formed in december 2006
Download
1 / 44

The US CLIVAR Drought Working Group (formed in December 2006) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 108 Views
  • Uploaded on

The US CLIVAR Drought Working Group (formed in December 2006). U.S. Membership Tom Delworth NOAA GFDL Rong Fu Georgia Institute of Technology Dave Gutzler (co-chair) University of New Mexico Wayne Higgins NOAA/CPC Marty Hoerling NOAA/CDC Randy Koster NASA/GSFC

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' The US CLIVAR Drought Working Group (formed in December 2006)' - ziv


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
The us clivar drought working group formed in december 2006
The US CLIVAR Drought Working Group(formed in December 2006)

U.S. Membership

  • Tom Delworth NOAA GFDL

  • Rong Fu Georgia Institute of Technology

  • Dave Gutzler (co-chair) University of New Mexico

  • Wayne Higgins NOAA/CPC

  • Marty Hoerling NOAA/CDC

  • Randy Koster NASA/GSFC

  • Arun Kumar NOAA/CPC

  • Dennis Lettenmaier University of Washington

  • Kingtse Mo NOAA CPC

  • Sumant Nigam University of Maryland

  • Roger Pulwarty NOAA- NIDIS Director

  • David Rind NASA - GISS

  • Siegfried Schubert (co-chair) NASA GSFC

  • Richard Seager Columbia University/LDEO

  • Mingfang Ting Columbia University/LDEO

  • Ning Zeng University of Maryland

    International Membership: Ex Officio

  • Bradfield Lyon International Research Institute for Climate

  • Victor O. Magana Mexico

  • Tim Palmer ECMWF

  • Ronald Stewart Canada

  • Jozef Syktus Australia

  • Jose Marengo CPTEC/INPE


Terms of reference
Terms of Reference

1) Propose a working definition of drought and related model predictands of drought (developed model-based indices);

2) Coordinate evaluations of existing relevant model simulations (developed list of relevant simulations);

3) Suggest new experiments (coupled and uncoupled) designed to address some of the outstanding uncertainties mentioned above (carried out acoordinated set of experiments);

4) Coordinate and encourage the analysis of observational data sets to reveal antecedent linkages of multi-year drought (developed list of datasets); and

5) Organize a community workshop to present and discuss the results (joint with CDPW in October 2008)

http://www.usclivar.org/Organization/drought-wg.html


Coordinated Global Model Experiments Addressing the Role of SSTs and Soil Moisture in Regional Drought

  • The idea is that several modelling groups would do identical idealized experiments to address issues of model dependence on the response to SSTs (and the role of soil moisture), and to look in more detail at the physical mechanisms linking the SST changes to drought

  • All runs 50+ years, fixed SST patterns added to seasonally varying SST climatology

  • Participating groups/models: NASA (NSIPP1), Lamont(CCM3), NCEP(GFS), GFDL (AM2.1), NCAR (CAM3.5), and COLA/Univ. of Miami/ (CCM3.0)


Sst forcing
SST Forcing SSTs and Soil Moisture in

  • Leading patterns of annual mean SST variability

    • (base on on 1901-2004 HADISST)

  • Climatological SST (control run)

  • Separate patterns of low (decadal) and high (ENSO) SST variability

  • Tropics-only component of above SST forcing

  • Uniform SST warming

  • Fixed soil moisture

  • AMIP runs (provide link to observed variations)


Leading EOFs and Time series (annual mean SST - 1901-2004) SSTs and Soil Moisture in

Linear Trend Pattern (LT)

Pacific Pattern (Pac)

Atlantic Pattern (Atl)


Annual 200mb Height Anomalies (m) SSTs and Soil Moisture in

Pacific Warm

Pacific Cold


Annual Tskin Anomalies (°C) SSTs and Soil Moisture in

Pacific Warm

Pacific Cold


Annual 200mb Height Anomalies (m) SSTs and Soil Moisture in

Atlantic warm

Atlantic cold


Annual Tskin Anomalies (°C) SSTs and Soil Moisture in

Atlantic warm

Atlantic cold


Composite of the Atlantic Warm Pool (AWP) SSTs and Soil Moisture in

  • ERSST from 1854-2006.

  • AWP variability is large.

  • Large AWPs are almost three times larger than the small ones.

Courtesy Chunzai Wang

NOAA AOML


The Caribbean Low-Level Jet (CLLJ) and Great Plains Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

CLLJ

GPLLJ

Vertically integrated moisture flux in summer (JJA):

Version 3.1; CAM3.1


Annual Precipitation (mm/day) Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

Pacific Coldand Atlantic Warm

Pacific Warm andAtlantic Cold


Multi Model Annual Mean response to idealized SST forcing Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

Contours are the multi model mean and shading indicates where all model have the same sign anomaly.

Multi model mean for Pacific and Atlantic responses include NSIPP, GFS, GFDL, CCM3, and CAM3.5 models.

The linear trend response does not include CAM3.5

200 mb Height (m)

Surface Temperature (K)

Courtesy Phil Pegion NOAA/CPC


Precipitation (mm/day) Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

Courtesy Phil Pegion NOAA/CPC


Annual mean gp precipitation y axis and temperature x axis

Pacific Warm Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

Pacific Cold

Annual Mean GP Precipitation (Y-axis) and Temperature (X-axis)


Annual mean gp precipitation y axis and temperature x axis1

Atlantic Warm Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

Atlantic Cold

Annual Mean GP Precipitation (Y-axis) and Temperature (X-axis)


Land Impacts on Temperature During Drought Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

T anomaly (JJA) during driest years minus mean T for control (PnAn)

Mean T for experiment minus mean T for control (PnAn)

T anomaly (JJA) during driest years minus mean T for

experiment

Courtesy Randy Koster NASA/GMAO

impact of land-atmosphere feedback (strengthened or weakened)

Total T anomaly during drought

T change from climate shift

)

(

=

+


Land Impacts on Temperature During Drought Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

T anomaly (JJA) during driest years minus mean T for

control (PnAn)

Mean T for experiment minus mean T for control (PnAn)

T anomaly (JJA) during driest years minus mean T for

experiment

For PwAc, drastically reduced drought warming relative to control…

impact of land-atmosphere feedback (strengthened or weakened)

Total T anomaly during drought

T change from climate shift

…is due in part to a climate shift…

)

(

=

+

…and in part to changes in the feedback character of the land surface.


Perpetual enso and drought over the united states
Perpetual ENSO and Drought over the United States Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

Kingtse Mo and Jae Schemm

Climate Prediction Center

NCEP/NWS/NOAA


Enso composites
ENSO composites Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

  • Project SSTA from 1915-2007 onto the first REOF for annual SSTA to obtain RPC

  • For each season, composites of SPI6, Soil moisture anomalies and SRI6 (for runoff) for warm and cold ENSO were formed when the RPC was greater (less) than one (negative) standard deviation.

  • Plot composite difference between cold and warm ENSO and average over 4 seasons together (Fig.1)

  • Drought: SPI6 < -0.8 and SRI6 < -0.8


ENSO Composites Cold-warm (Obs) Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

Multi model ensemble

Multi model ensemble captures the relationships between ENSO & drought over the United States


Conclusions
Conclusions Low-Level Jet (GPLLJ) transport moisture from the AWP to the eastern North Pacific and the central United States, respectively.

  • Drought is measured by persistent positive precipitation, soil moisture and runoff anomalies using indices SPI6, SRI6 and SM anomalies.

  • All indices indicate that drought is more likely to occur over the Southwest, and the Great Plains during cold ENSO.

  • The individual model experiment differs , but the multi model ensemble captures the relationships between ENSO and drought well


Evaluation of the links between SE US summer rainfall variability and SSTA simulated by NSIPP, GFDL AM2.0 and CCSM3(we do not have AMIP run for CCSM3.5)

Courtesy Rong Fu Georgia Tech


How well can models reproduce the relationship between SE US summer rainfall anomalies (P) and N. tropical Atlantic SSTA?

Observed

NSIPP capture the observed correlation between Natl SSTA and P at 1- year period during early 80s and early 90s, but phase relation is not realistic.

The correlation at 4-year scale is too strong in all three models compared to observation.

Period (Year)

0o: in phase

90o: NAtl

Leads PI

1980

1990

2000

GFDL AM2.1

CCM3

NSIPP


Great Plains Precipitation Anomaly summer rainfall anomalies (Seasonal precipitation anomalies smoothed by 12 applications of 1-2-1 averagingThe smoothed PRECIP index mimics PDSI (correlation of detrended series ~0.85)

Simulation of 20th Century North American Hydroclimate

Variability by the Drought Working Group Models

Alfredo Ruiz-Barradas, Sumant Nigam, U of Maryland

Full Century (1901-2002)

Dust Bowl

1950s Drought

Half Century (1950-2000)

Full Century (1901-2002) Correlations

[CRU_P, CCM3_P] =0.36 (0.37 detrend)

[CRU_P, CAM3.5_P]=0.32 (0.33 detrend)

[CRU_P, GFDLAM2.1_P]=0.26 (0.37 detrend)

[CRU_P, PDSI] =0.82 (0.84 detrend)

Half Century (1950-2000) Correlations

[CRU_P, CCM3_P] =0.58 (0.50 detrend)

[CRU_P, CAM3.5_P]=0.38 (0.19 detrend)

[CRU_P, GFS_P] =0.28 (0.19 detrend)

[CRU_P, GFDLAM2.1_P] =0.49 (0.46 detrend)

[CRU_P, NSIPP_P] =0.27 (0.04 detrend)


SST Correlations of the summer rainfall anomalies (Great Plains SummerPRECIP Indices (1950-2000)All-season precipitation indices are first detrended and then smoothed(as before) to generate PDSI proxies. The summertime proxy indices are then correlated with detrended SSTs.

CRUTS2.1

CAM3.5

  • GFS has fairly realistic correlations over the Pacific but not the Atlantic.

  • CCM3’s Pacific correlations are too strong, NSIPP’s too weak, and CAM3.5’s and GFDLAM2.1’s somewhere in between.

  • Atlantic links are comparable to the Pacific ones in observations but weaker in model simulations (with less accord among them as well).

  • CCM3 and CAM3.5 exhibit Indian Ocean connectivity, with little support from observations

CCM3

GFS

NSIPP

The spread in models’ performance makes the CLIVAR Drought Modeling exercise worthwhile

GFDLAM2.1


Cmip runs courtesy marty hoerling

CMIP - Runs summer rainfall anomalies (Courtesy Marty Hoerling

(Link to Ben Kirtman’s Results)


Other applications of the runs
Other Applications of the Runs summer rainfall anomalies (

  • E.g., hurricanes


Shear
Shear summer rainfall anomalies (


Shear1
Shear summer rainfall anomalies (


Shear2
Shear summer rainfall anomalies (


Shear3
Shear summer rainfall anomalies (


Shear4
Shear summer rainfall anomalies (


Shear5
Shear summer rainfall anomalies (


Summary
Summary summer rainfall anomalies (

  • The USCLIVAR WG on drought is making progress on achieving its research goals to improve our understanding of long term regional drought

  • A series of coordinated global model experiments is providing important new information on the mechanisms (SST and soil moisture) that lead to long term regional drought including an assessment of model dependence

    • The idealized runs represent a substantial community investment in computing (thousands of years of simulation involving most of the major US modeling centers)

    • Initial results will be presented and discussed in a joint CDP and USCLIVAR workshop in October

    • The results of all the experiments will be made available in October of this year to the general community for analysis (some groups have already made their runs available)


Relevant publications
Relevant Publications summer rainfall anomalies (

Schubert, S., R. Koster, M. Hoerling, R. Seager, D. Lettenmaier, A. Kumar, and D. Gutzler, 2007: Predicting Drought on Seasonal-to-Decadal Time Scales. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 88, 1625–1630

Gutzler, D. and S. Schubert, 2007: The U.S. CLIVAR Working Group on Long-Term Drought,”, U.S. CLIVAR Variations (Spring 2007, volume 5, No. 1).

Drought WG +, 2008: A USCLIVAR Project to Assess and Compare the Responses of Global Climate Models to Drought-Related SST Forcing Patterns. Manuscript in preparation

Schubert, S.D., M. J. Suarez, P. J. Pegion, R. D. Koster, H. Wang and J. T. Bacmeister, 2008: A mechanistic study of the impact of SSTs on drought and pluvial conditions over the United States. Manuscript in preparation.

Wang, A., T. J. Bohn, D. P. Lettenmaier, S. Mahanama, and R. D. Koster, 2008: Multimodel ensemble reconstruction of drought over the continental United States. Manuscript in preparation.

Koster, R. D., Z. Guo, P. A. Dirmeyer, R. Yang, and K. Mitchell, 2008: On the nature of soil moisture in land surface models. Manuscript in preparation

Expect many more in the coming months on model results …


For cold ENSO, all indices show: summer rainfall anomalies (

Dryness over the Southwest, areas along the Gulf of Mexico and Great Plains

For warm ENSO, the situation reverses

Fig .1: composites based on the ENSO Pacific SST pattern


Procedures to analyze model runs
Procedures to analyze model runs summer rainfall anomalies (

  • Pool all monthly mean P together from all 9 experiments for a given model.

  • Calculate 6 month standardized precipitation index (SPI6). For drought, the 6-month SPI needed to be less than -0.8.

  • For each experiment, we count the number of months (num) that SPI6 indicates drought. Obtain percentile by dividing num by the total months of the experiment.

  • Multi model ensemble : Average of four models (GFS,NSIPP,CCM3 and GFDL) for each experiment.

  • The statistical significant test was done using the Monte Carlo method.


For wPna: The ensemble shows that there are less drought events over the Southwest, Great Plains

For cPna: There are more drought events over the above areas

Fig.2 Ensemble: percentile of the number of months under drought averaged over GFS, NSIPP, CCM3 and GFDL.


0 events over the Southwest, Great Plainso: in phase

90o: Nino

Leads PI

How well can models AMIP runs reproduce the relationship between SE US summer rainfall anomalies (P) and Nino?

Correlation

coefficient

Joint wavelet coherence:

NSIPP and GFDLAM2.1 capture the observed correlation between Nino34 (lead) and SE US summer rainfall variability of 0.5-1 year period during mid 80s and early 90s.

ENSO forcing on P seems to be too strong and too persistent in all models. Only NSIPP shows decadal variability of P-NINO34 correlation.

Observed

Period (Year)

1980

1990

2000

GFDL AM2.1

CCM3

NSIPP


Ncar community atmospheric model version 3 1 cam3 1
NCAR Community Atmospheric Model (Version 3.1; CAM3.1) events over the Southwest, Great Plains

  • A global spectral model (T42 with 26 vertical layers; equivalent to a 2.8°2.8° horizontal resolution).

  • SST from the Hadley Centre (UK) as the model-forcing.

  • The control (CTRL) ensemble (with 18 members) run: Climatological SST is prescribed globally.

  • The large AWP (LAWP) ensemble run: SST composite for large AWP is used in the AWP region.

  • The small AWP (SAWP) ensemble run: SST composite for small AWP is used in the AWP region.

  • The difference is taken between the LAWP and SAWP runs.


Impact of the AWP on North Atlantic Subtropical High (NASH) events over the Southwest, Great Plains

SLP’s response to AWP variability in JJA

The AWP weakens the NASH (especially at its southwestern edge) and strengthens summer continental low over the North American monsoon region.


Impact of the AWP on Rainfall during Summer (JJA) events over the Southwest, Great Plains

Precipitation response to AWP variability

Large (small) AWP decreases (increases) rainfall in the United States east of the Rocky Mountains, in agreement with observations.


Simulation of 20 events over the Southwest, Great Plainsth Century North American Hydroclimate Variability by the Drought Working Group Models

Objective:

Assess capabilities of the DWG atmospheric models in simulating seasonal and low-frequency summer hydroclimate variability over North America

Models examined:

NSIPP (NASA/GSFC; 2.5lon x 2.0lat, 5th AMIP ens mem, 1930-2004)

CCM3 (LDEO; T-42 goga_new runs atm, 1st ens mem, 1856-2007)

CAM3.5 (NCAR; T-85, one run completed recently, 1871-2006)

GFS (NOAA/NCEP; T62L64 version of current CFS, 1950-2001)

AM2.1 (NOAA/GFDL; 144x90, 7th AMIP ens mem, 1870-1999)

Alfredo Ruiz-Barradas and Sumant Nigam

University of Maryland


ad