2020
DOI
bib
abs
Snow cover duration trends observed at sites and predicted bymultiple models
Richard Essery,
Hyungjun Kim,
Libo Wang,
Paul Bartlett,
Aaron Boone,
Claire Brutel‐Vuilmet,
Eleanor Burke,
Matthias Cuntz,
Bertrand Decharme,
Emanuel Dutra,
Xing Fang,
Yeugeniy M. Gusev,
Stefan Hagemann,
Vanessa Haverd,
Anna Kontu,
Gerhard Krinner,
Matthieu Lafaysse,
Yves Lejeune,
Thomas Marke,
Danny Marks,
Christoph Marty,
Cécile B. Ménard,
О. Н. Насонова,
Tomoko Nitta,
John W. Pomeroy,
Gerd Schaedler,
В. А. Семенов,
Tatiana G. Smirnova,
Sean Swenson,
Dmitry Turkov,
Nander Wever,
Hua Yuan
Abstract. Thirty-year simulations of seasonal snow cover in 22 physically based models driven with bias-corrected meteorological reanalyses are examined at four sites with long records of snow observations. Annual snow cover durations differ widely between models but interannual variations are strongly correlated because of the common driving data. No significant trends are observed in starting dates for seasonal snow cover, but there are significant trends towards snow cover ending earlier at two of the sites in observations and most of the models. A simplified model with just two parameters controlling solar radiation and sensible heat contributions to snowmelt spans the ranges of snow cover durations and trends. This model predicts that sites where snow persists beyond annual peaks in solar radiation and air temperature will experience rapid decreases in snow cover duration with warming as snow begins to melt earlier and at times of year with more energy available for melting.
DOI
bib
abs
Snow cover duration trends observed at sites and predicted by multiple models
Richard Essery,
Hyungjun Kim,
Libo Wang,
Paul Bartlett,
Aaron Boone,
Claire Brutel‐Vuilmet,
Eleanor Burke,
Matthias Cuntz,
Bertrand Decharme,
Emanuel Dutra,
Xing Fang,
Yeugeniy M. Gusev,
Stefan Hagemann,
Vanessa Haverd,
Anna Kontu,
Gerhard Krinner,
Matthieu Lafaysse,
Yves Lejeune,
Thomas Marke,
Danny Marks,
Christoph Marty,
Cécile B. Ménard,
О. Н. Насонова,
Tomoko Nitta,
John W. Pomeroy,
Gerd Schädler,
В. А. Семенов,
Tatiana G. Smirnova,
Sean Swenson,
Dmitry Turkov,
Nander Wever,
Hua Yuan
The Cryosphere, Volume 14, Issue 12
Abstract. The 30-year simulations of seasonal snow cover in 22 physically based models driven with bias-corrected meteorological reanalyses are examined at four sites with long records of snow observations. Annual snow cover durations differ widely between models, but interannual variations are strongly correlated because of the common driving data. No significant trends are observed in starting dates for seasonal snow cover, but there are significant trends towards snow cover ending earlier at two of the sites in observations and most of the models. A simplified model with just two parameters controlling solar radiation and sensible heat contributions to snowmelt spans the ranges of snow cover durations and trends. This model predicts that sites where snow persists beyond annual peaks in solar radiation and air temperature will experience rapid decreases in snow cover duration with warming as snow begins to melt earlier and at times of year with more energy available for melting.
2018
DOI
bib
abs
ESM-SnowMIP: assessing snow models and quantifying snow-related climate feedbacks
Gerhard Krinner,
Chris Derksen,
Richard Essery,
M. Flanner,
Stefan Hagemann,
Martyn P. Clark,
Alex Hall,
Helmut Rott,
Claire Brutel‐Vuilmet,
Hyungjun Kim,
Cécile B. Ménard,
Lawrence Mudryk,
Chad W. Thackeray,
Libo Wang,
Gabriele Arduini,
Gianpaolo Balsamo,
Paul Bartlett,
Julia Boike,
Aaron Boone,
F. Chéruy,
Jeanne Colin,
Matthias Cuntz,
Yongjiu Dai,
Bertrand Decharme,
Jeff Derry,
Agnès Ducharne,
Emanuel Dutra,
Xing Fang,
Charles Fierz,
Josephine Ghattas,
Yeugeniy M. Gusev,
Vanessa Haverd,
Anna Kontu,
Matthieu Lafaysse,
R. M. Law,
David M. Lawrence,
Weiping Li,
Thomas Marke,
Danny Marks,
Martin Ménégoz,
О. Н. Насонова,
Tomoko Nitta,
Michio Niwano,
John W. Pomeroy,
Mark S. Raleigh,
Gerd Schaedler,
В. А. Семенов,
Tanya Smirnova,
Tobias Stacke,
Ulrich Strasser,
Sean Svenson,
Dmitry Turkov,
Tao Wang,
Nander Wever,
Hua Yuan,
Wenyan Zhou,
Dan Zhu
Geoscientific Model Development, Volume 11, Issue 12
Abstract. This paper describes ESM-SnowMIP, an international coordinated modelling effort to evaluate current snow schemes, including snow schemes that are included in Earth system models, in a wide variety of settings against local and global observations. The project aims to identify crucial processes and characteristics that need to be improved in snow models in the context of local- and global-scale modelling. A further objective of ESM-SnowMIP is to better quantify snow-related feedbacks in the Earth system. Although it is not part of the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), ESM-SnowMIP is tightly linked to the CMIP6-endorsed Land Surface, Snow and Soil Moisture Model Intercomparison (LS3MIP).
2016
The June 2013 flood in the Canadian Rockies featured rain‐on‐snow (ROS) runoff generation at alpine elevations that contributed to the high streamflows observed during the event. Such a mid‐summer ROS event has not been diagnosed in detail, and a diagnosis may help to understand future high discharge‐producing hydrometeorological events in mountainous cold regions. The alpine hydrology of the flood was simulated using a physically based model created with the modular cold regions hydrological modelling platform. The event was distinctive in that, although at first, relatively warm rain fell onto existing snowdrifts inducing ROS melt; the rainfall turned to snowfall as the air mass cooled and so increased snowcover and snowpacks in alpine regions, which then melted rapidly from ground heat fluxes in the latter part of the event. Melt rates of existing snowpacks were substantially lower during the ROS than during the relatively sunny periods preceding and following the event as a result of low wind speeds, cloud cover and cool temperatures. However, at the basin scale, melt volumes increased during the event as a result of increased snowcover from the fresh snowfall and consequent large ground heat contributions to melt energy, causing snowmelt to enhance rainfall–runoff by one fifth. Flow pathways also shifted during the event from relatively slow sub‐surface flow prior to the flood to an even contribution from sub‐surface and fast overland flow during and immediately after the event. This early summer, high precipitation ROS event was distinctive for the impact of decreased solar irradiance in suppressing melt rates, the contribution of ground heat flux to basin scale snowmelt after precipitation turned to snowfall, the transition from slow sub‐surface to fast overland flow runoff as the sub‐surface storage saturated and streamflow volumes that exceeded precipitation. These distinctions show that summer, mountain ROS events should be considered quite distinct from winter ROS and can be important contributors to catastrophic events. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.