Erik Kluzek


2021

DOI bib
A Vector‐Based River Routing Model for Earth System Models: Parallelization and Global Applications
Naoki Mizukami, Martyn P. Clark, Shervan Gharari, Erik Kluzek, Ming Pan, Peirong Lin, Hylke E. Beck, Dai Yamazaki
Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, Volume 13, Issue 6

A vector‐river network explicitly uses realistic geometries of river reaches and catchments for spatial discretization in a river model. This enables improving the accuracy of the physical properties of the modeled river system, compared to a gridded river network that has been used in Earth System Models. With a finer‐scale river network, resolving smaller‐scale river reaches, there is a need for efficient methods to route streamflow and its constituents throughout the river network. The purpose of this study is twofold: (1) develop a new method to decompose river networks into hydrologically independent tributary domains, where routing computations can be performed in parallel; and (2) perform global river routing simulations with two global river networks, with different scales, to examine the computational efficiency and the differences in discharge simulations at various temporal scales. The new parallelization method uses a hierarchical decomposition strategy, where each decomposed tributary is further decomposed into many sub‐tributary domains, enabling hybrid parallel computing. This parallelization scheme has excellent computational scaling for the global domain where it is straightforward to distribute computations across many independent river basins. However, parallel computing for a single large basin remains challenging. The global routing experiments show that the scale of the vector‐river network has less impact on the discharge simulations than the runoff input that is generated by the combination of land surface model and meteorological forcing. The scale of vector‐river networks needs to consider the scale of local hydrologic features such as lakes that are to be resolved in the network.

2019

DOI bib
The Community Land Model Version 5: Description of New Features, Benchmarking, and Impact of Forcing Uncertainty
David M. Lawrence, Rosie A. Fisher, Charles D. Koven, Keith W. Oleson, Sean Swenson, G. B. Bonan, Nathan Collier, Bardan Ghimire, Leo van Kampenhout, Daniel Kennedy, Erik Kluzek, Fang Li, Hongyi Li, Danica Lombardozzi, William J. Riley, William J. Sacks, Mingjie Shi, Mariana Vertenstein, William R. Wieder, Chonggang Xu, Ashehad A. Ali, Andrew M. Badger, Gautam Bisht, Michiel van den Broeke, Michael A. Brunke, Sean P. Burns, Jonathan Buzan, Martyn P. Clark, Anthony P Craig, Kyla M. Dahlin, Beth Drewniak, Joshua B. Fisher, M. Flanner, A. M. Fox, Pierre Gentine, Forrest M. Hoffman, G. Keppel‐Aleks, R. G. Knox, Sanjiv Kumar, Jan T. M. Lenaerts, L. Ruby Leung, William H. Lipscomb, Yaqiong Lü, Ashutosh Pandey, Jon D. Pelletier, J. Perket, James T. Randerson, Daniel M. Ricciuto, Benjamin M. Sanderson, A. G. Slater, Z. M. Subin, Jinyun Tang, R. Quinn Thomas, Maria Val Martin, Xubin Zeng
Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, Volume 11, Issue 12

The Community Land Model (CLM) is the land component of the Community Earth System Model (CESM) and is used in several global and regional modeling systems. In this paper, we introduce model developments included in CLM version 5 (CLM5), which is the default land component for CESM2. We assess an ensemble of simulations, including prescribed and prognostic vegetation state, multiple forcing data sets, and CLM4, CLM4.5, and CLM5, against a range of metrics including from the International Land Model Benchmarking (ILAMBv2) package. CLM5 includes new and updated processes and parameterizations: (1) dynamic land units, (2) updated parameterizations and structure for hydrology and snow (spatially explicit soil depth, dry surface layer, revised groundwater scheme, revised canopy interception and canopy snow processes, updated fresh snow density, simple firn model, and Model for Scale Adaptive River Transport), (3) plant hydraulics and hydraulic redistribution, (4) revised nitrogen cycling (flexible leaf stoichiometry, leaf N optimization for photosynthesis, and carbon costs for plant nitrogen uptake), (5) global crop model with six crop types and time‐evolving irrigated areas and fertilization rates, (6) updated urban building energy, (7) carbon isotopes, and (8) updated stomatal physiology. New optional features include demographically structured dynamic vegetation model (Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator), ozone damage to plants, and fire trace gas emissions coupling to the atmosphere. Conclusive establishment of improvement or degradation of individual variables or metrics is challenged by forcing uncertainty, parametric uncertainty, and model structural complexity, but the multivariate metrics presented here suggest a general broad improvement from CLM4 to CLM5.