Assessment of the cloud liquid water from climate models and reanalysis using satellite observations

We perform a model-observation comparison and report on the state-of-the-art cloud liquid water content (CLWC) and path (CLWP) outputs from the present-day global climate models (GCMs) simulations in CMIP3/CMIP5, two other GCMs (UCLA and GEOS5) and two reanalyses (ECMWF Interim and MERRA) in compari...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jui-lin F. Li, Seungwon Lee, Hsi-Yen Ma, G. Stephens, Bin Guan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Chinese Geoscience Union 2018-01-01
Series:Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences
Online Access: http://tao.cgu.org.tw/media/k2/attachments/v296p653.pdf
id doaj-c550e34037154e6493fb14f97b02ea28
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c550e34037154e6493fb14f97b02ea282020-11-24T21:31:44ZengChinese Geoscience UnionTerrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences1017-08392311-76802018-01-0129665367810.3319/TAO.2018.07.04.01Assessment of the cloud liquid water from climate models and reanalysis using satellite observationsJui-lin F. LiSeungwon LeeHsi-Yen MaG. StephensBin GuanWe perform a model-observation comparison and report on the state-of-the-art cloud liquid water content (CLWC) and path (CLWP) outputs from the present-day global climate models (GCMs) simulations in CMIP3/CMIP5, two other GCMs (UCLA and GEOS5) and two reanalyses (ECMWF Interim and MERRA) in comparison with two satellites observational datasets (CloudSat and MODIS). We use two different liquid water observation products from CloudSat and MODIS, for CLWP and their combined product for LWC with a method to remove the contribution from precipitating and convective core hydrometeors so that more meaningful model-observation comparisons can be made. Considering the CloudSat’s limitations of CLWC retrievals due to contamination from the precipitation and from radar clutter near the surface, an estimate CLWC is synergistically constructed using MODIS CLWP and CloudSat CLWC. The model-observation comparison shows that most of the CMIP3/CMIP5 annual mean CLWP values are overestimated by factors of 2 - 10 compared to observations globally. There are a number of CMIP5 models, including CSIRO, MPI, and the UCLA GCM that perform well compared to the other models. For the vertical structure of CLWC, significant systematic biases are found with many models biased significantly high above the mid-troposphere. In the tropics, systematic high biases occur at all levels above 700 hPa. Based on the Taylor diagram, the ensemble performance of CMIP5 CLWP simulation shows little or no improvement relative to CMIP3. http://tao.cgu.org.tw/media/k2/attachments/v296p653.pdf
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Jui-lin F. Li
Seungwon Lee
Hsi-Yen Ma
G. Stephens
Bin Guan
spellingShingle Jui-lin F. Li
Seungwon Lee
Hsi-Yen Ma
G. Stephens
Bin Guan
Assessment of the cloud liquid water from climate models and reanalysis using satellite observations
Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences
author_facet Jui-lin F. Li
Seungwon Lee
Hsi-Yen Ma
G. Stephens
Bin Guan
author_sort Jui-lin F. Li
title Assessment of the cloud liquid water from climate models and reanalysis using satellite observations
title_short Assessment of the cloud liquid water from climate models and reanalysis using satellite observations
title_full Assessment of the cloud liquid water from climate models and reanalysis using satellite observations
title_fullStr Assessment of the cloud liquid water from climate models and reanalysis using satellite observations
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of the cloud liquid water from climate models and reanalysis using satellite observations
title_sort assessment of the cloud liquid water from climate models and reanalysis using satellite observations
publisher Chinese Geoscience Union
series Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences
issn 1017-0839
2311-7680
publishDate 2018-01-01
description We perform a model-observation comparison and report on the state-of-the-art cloud liquid water content (CLWC) and path (CLWP) outputs from the present-day global climate models (GCMs) simulations in CMIP3/CMIP5, two other GCMs (UCLA and GEOS5) and two reanalyses (ECMWF Interim and MERRA) in comparison with two satellites observational datasets (CloudSat and MODIS). We use two different liquid water observation products from CloudSat and MODIS, for CLWP and their combined product for LWC with a method to remove the contribution from precipitating and convective core hydrometeors so that more meaningful model-observation comparisons can be made. Considering the CloudSat’s limitations of CLWC retrievals due to contamination from the precipitation and from radar clutter near the surface, an estimate CLWC is synergistically constructed using MODIS CLWP and CloudSat CLWC. The model-observation comparison shows that most of the CMIP3/CMIP5 annual mean CLWP values are overestimated by factors of 2 - 10 compared to observations globally. There are a number of CMIP5 models, including CSIRO, MPI, and the UCLA GCM that perform well compared to the other models. For the vertical structure of CLWC, significant systematic biases are found with many models biased significantly high above the mid-troposphere. In the tropics, systematic high biases occur at all levels above 700 hPa. Based on the Taylor diagram, the ensemble performance of CMIP5 CLWP simulation shows little or no improvement relative to CMIP3.
url http://tao.cgu.org.tw/media/k2/attachments/v296p653.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT juilinfli assessmentofthecloudliquidwaterfromclimatemodelsandreanalysisusingsatelliteobservations
AT seungwonlee assessmentofthecloudliquidwaterfromclimatemodelsandreanalysisusingsatelliteobservations
AT hsiyenma assessmentofthecloudliquidwaterfromclimatemodelsandreanalysisusingsatelliteobservations
AT gstephens assessmentofthecloudliquidwaterfromclimatemodelsandreanalysisusingsatelliteobservations
AT binguan assessmentofthecloudliquidwaterfromclimatemodelsandreanalysisusingsatelliteobservations
_version_ 1725960063227527168