Articles | Volume 16, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1359-2023
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1359-2023
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
27 Feb 2023
Methods for assessment of models |  | 27 Feb 2023

Incorporation of aerosol into the COSPv2 satellite lidar simulator for climate model evaluation

Marine Bonazzola, Hélène Chepfer, Po-Lun Ma, Johannes Quaas, David M. Winker, Artem Feofilov, and Nick Schutgens

Related authors

General circulation models simulate negative liquid water path–droplet number correlations, but anthropogenic aerosols still increase simulated liquid water path
Johannes Mülmenstädt, Edward Gryspeerdt, Sudhakar Dipu, Johannes Quaas, Andrew S. Ackerman, Ann M. Fridlind, Florian Tornow, Susanne E. Bauer, Andrew Gettelman, Yi Ming, Youtong Zheng, Po-Lun Ma, Hailong Wang, Kai Zhang, Matthew W. Christensen, Adam C. Varble, L. Ruby Leung, Xiaohong Liu, David Neubauer, Daniel G. Partridge, Philip Stier, and Toshihiko Takemura
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7331–7345, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7331-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7331-2024, 2024
Short summary
A Level 3 monthly gridded ice cloud dataset derived from 12 years of CALIOP measurements
David Winker, Xia Cai, Mark Vaughan, Anne Garnier, Brian Magill, Melody Avery, and Brian Getzewich
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2831–2855, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2831-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2831-2024, 2024
Short summary
Droplet collection efficiencies inferred from satellite retrievals constrain effective radiative forcing of aerosol–cloud interactions
Charlotte M. Beall, Po-Lun Ma, Matthew W. Christensen, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Adam Varble, Kentaroh Suzuki, and Takuro Michibata
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 5287–5302, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5287-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5287-2024, 2024
Short summary
Impacts of spatial heterogeneity of anthropogenic aerosol emissions in a regionally refined global aerosol–climate model
Taufiq Hassan, Kai Zhang, Jianfeng Li, Balwinder Singh, Shixuan Zhang, Hailong Wang, and Po-Lun Ma
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3507–3532, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3507-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3507-2024, 2024
Short summary
Earth Virtualization Engines (EVE)
Bjorn Stevens, Stefan Adami, Tariq Ali, Hartwig Anzt, Zafer Aslan, Sabine Attinger, Jaana Bäck, Johanna Baehr, Peter Bauer, Natacha Bernier, Bob Bishop, Hendryk Bockelmann, Sandrine Bony, Guy Brasseur, David N. Bresch, Sean Breyer, Gilbert Brunet, Pier Luigi Buttigieg, Junji Cao, Christelle Castet, Yafang Cheng, Ayantika Dey Choudhury, Deborah Coen, Susanne Crewell, Atish Dabholkar, Qing Dai, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Dale Durran, Ayoub El Gaidi, Charlie Ewen, Eleftheria Exarchou, Veronika Eyring, Florencia Falkinhoff, David Farrell, Piers M. Forster, Ariane Frassoni, Claudia Frauen, Oliver Fuhrer, Shahzad Gani, Edwin Gerber, Debra Goldfarb, Jens Grieger, Nicolas Gruber, Wilco Hazeleger, Rolf Herken, Chris Hewitt, Torsten Hoefler, Huang-Hsiung Hsu, Daniela Jacob, Alexandra Jahn, Christian Jakob, Thomas Jung, Christopher Kadow, In-Sik Kang, Sarah Kang, Karthik Kashinath, Katharina Kleinen-von Königslöw, Daniel Klocke, Uta Kloenne, Milan Klöwer, Chihiro Kodama, Stefan Kollet, Tobias Kölling, Jenni Kontkanen, Steve Kopp, Michal Koran, Markku Kulmala, Hanna Lappalainen, Fakhria Latifi, Bryan Lawrence, June Yi Lee, Quentin Lejeun, Christian Lessig, Chao Li, Thomas Lippert, Jürg Luterbacher, Pekka Manninen, Jochem Marotzke, Satoshi Matsouoka, Charlotte Merchant, Peter Messmer, Gero Michel, Kristel Michielsen, Tomoki Miyakawa, Jens Müller, Ramsha Munir, Sandeep Narayanasetti, Ousmane Ndiaye, Carlos Nobre, Achim Oberg, Riko Oki, Tuba Özkan-Haller, Tim Palmer, Stan Posey, Andreas Prein, Odessa Primus, Mike Pritchard, Julie Pullen, Dian Putrasahan, Johannes Quaas, Krishnan Raghavan, Venkatachalam Ramaswamy, Markus Rapp, Florian Rauser, Markus Reichstein, Aromar Revi, Sonakshi Saluja, Masaki Satoh, Vera Schemann, Sebastian Schemm, Christina Schnadt Poberaj, Thomas Schulthess, Cath Senior, Jagadish Shukla, Manmeet Singh, Julia Slingo, Adam Sobel, Silvina Solman, Jenna Spitzer, Philip Stier, Thomas Stocker, Sarah Strock, Hang Su, Petteri Taalas, John Taylor, Susann Tegtmeier, Georg Teutsch, Adrian Tompkins, Uwe Ulbrich, Pier-Luigi Vidale, Chien-Ming Wu, Hao Xu, Najibullah Zaki, Laure Zanna, Tianjun Zhou, and Florian Ziemen
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2113–2122, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, 2024
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
WRF-Comfort: simulating microscale variability in outdoor heat stress at the city scale with a mesoscale model
Alberto Martilli, Negin Nazarian, E. Scott Krayenhoff, Jacob Lachapelle, Jiachen Lu, Esther Rivas, Alejandro Rodriguez-Sanchez, Beatriz Sanchez, and José Luis Santiago
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5023–5039, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5023-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5023-2024, 2024
Short summary
Representing effects of surface heterogeneity in a multi-plume eddy diffusivity mass flux boundary layer parameterization
Nathan P. Arnold
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5041–5056, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5041-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5041-2024, 2024
Short summary
Can TROPOMI NO2 satellite data be used to track the drop in and resurgence of NOx emissions in Germany between 2019–2021 using the multi-source plume method (MSPM)?
Enrico Dammers, Janot Tokaya, Christian Mielke, Kevin Hausmann, Debora Griffin, Chris McLinden, Henk Eskes, and Renske Timmermans
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4983–5007, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4983-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4983-2024, 2024
Short summary
A spatiotemporally separated framework for reconstructing the sources of atmospheric radionuclide releases
Yuhan Xu, Sheng Fang, Xinwen Dong, and Shuhan Zhuang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4961–4982, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4961-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4961-2024, 2024
Short summary
A parameterization scheme for the floating wind farm in a coupled atmosphere–wave model (COAWST v3.7)
Shaokun Deng, Shengmu Yang, Shengli Chen, Daoyi Chen, Xuefeng Yang, and Shanshan Cui
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4891–4909, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4891-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4891-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Bonazzola, M.: ATB CALIOP profiles, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7107232, 2022a. 
Bonazzola, M.: CALIOP SR profiles, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7107162, 2022b. 
Bonazzola, M. and Chepfer, H.: COSPv2.0: Adding lidar aerosol simulator, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7418199, 2022. 
Cesana, G. and Chepfer, H.: How well do climate models simulate cloud vertical structure? a comparison between CALIPSO-GOCCP satellite observations and CMIP5 models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L20803, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053153, 2012. 
Cesana, G. and Chepfer, H.: Evaluation of the cloud water phase in a climate model using CALIPSO-GOCCP, J. Geophys. Res., 118, 7922–7937, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50376, 2013. 
Download
Short summary
Aerosol has a large impact on climate. Using a lidar aerosol simulator ensures consistent comparisons between modeled and observed aerosol. We present a lidar aerosol simulator that applies a cloud masking and an aerosol detection threshold. We estimate the lidar signals that would be observed at 532 nm by the Cloud-Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization overflying the atmosphere predicted by a climate model. Our comparison at the seasonal timescale shows a discrepancy in the Southern Ocean.