Articles | Volume 17, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4135-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4135-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
22 May 2024
Development and technical paper |
| 22 May 2024
| 22 May 2024
Parallel SnowModel (v1.0): a parallel implementation of a distributed snow-evolution modeling system (SnowModel)
Ross Mower
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
The NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
Ethan D. Gutmann
The NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
Glen E. Liston
Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
Jessica Lundquist
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
Soren Rasmussen
The NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
Related authors
Zachary Hoppinen, Shadi Oveisgharan, Hans-Peter Marshall, Ross Mower, Kelly Elder, and Carrie Vuyovich
The Cryosphere, 18, 575–592, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-575-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-575-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We used changes in radar echo travel time from multiple airborne flights to estimate changes in snow depths across Idaho for two winters. We compared our radar-derived retrievals to snow pits, weather stations, and a 100 m resolution numerical snow model. We had a strong Pearson correlation and root mean squared error of 10 cm relative to in situ measurements. Our retrievals also correlated well with our model, especially in regions of dry snow and low tree coverage.
Esteban Alonso-González, Adrian Harpold, Jessica D. Lundquist, Cara Piske, Laura Sourp, Kristoffer Aalstad, and Simon Gascoin
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2347, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2347, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Simulating the snowpack is challenging, as there are several sources of uncertainty due to e.g. the meteorological forcing. Using data assimilation techniques, it is possible to improve the simulations by fusing models and snow observations. However in forests, observations are difficult to obtain, because they cannot be retrieved through the canopy. Here, we explore the possibility of propagating the information obtained in forest clearings to areas covered by the canopy.
Sean P. Burns, Vincent Humphrey, Ethan D. Gutmann, Mark S. Raleigh, David R. Bowling, and Peter D. Blanken
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1755, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1755, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We compared two techniques that are affected by the amount of liquid water in a forest canopy. One technique relies on remote sensing (a pair of GPS systems) and the other uses tree motion generated by the wind. Though completely different, these two techniques show strikingly similar changes when rain falls on an evergreen forest. We combine these measurements with eddy-covariance fluxes of water vapor to provide some insight into the evaporation of canopy-intercepted precipitation.
Mari R. Tye, Ming Ge, Jadwiga H. Richter, Ethan D. Gutmann, Allyson Rugg, Cindy L. Bruyère, Sue Ellen Haupt, Flavio Lehner, Rachel McCrary, Andrew J. Newman, and Andy Wood
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 1117–1133, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1117-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1117-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
There is a perceived mismatch between the spatial scales on which global climate models can produce data and those needed for water management decisions. However, poor communication of specific metrics relevant to local decisions is also a problem. We assessed the credibility of a set of water management decision metrics in the Community Earth System Model v2 (CESM2). CESM2 shows potentially greater use of its output in long-range water management decisions.
Zachary Fair, Carrie Vuyovich, Thomas Neumann, Justin Pflug, David Shean, Ellyn M. Enderlin, Karina Zikan, Hannah Besso, Jessica Lundquist, Cesar Deschamps-Berger, and Désirée Treichler
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3992, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3992, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Lidar is commonly used to measure snow over global water reservoirs. However, ground-based and airborne lidar surveys are expensive, so satellite-based methods are needed. In this review, we outline the latest research using satellite-based lidar to monitor snow. Best practices for lidar-based snow monitoring are given, as is a discussion on challenges in this field of research.
Polona Itkin and Glen E. Liston
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3402, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3402, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The MOSAiC project provided a year of observations of Arctic snow and sea ice, though some data were interrupted, especially during summer melt onset. We developed a data-model fusion system to produce continuous, high-resolution time series of snow and sea ice parameters. On all three analyzed three ice types snow redistribution correlated with sea ice deformation and level ice thickness was governed by the thinnest fraction of snow cover.
Cecile B. Menard, Sirpa Rasmus, Ioanna Merkouriadi, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Annett Bartsch, Chris Derksen, Florent Domine, Marie Dumont, Dorothee Ehrich, Richard Essery, Bruce C. Forbes, Gerhard Krinner, David Lawrence, Glen Liston, Heidrun Matthes, Nick Rutter, Melody Sandells, Martin Schneebeli, and Sari Stark
The Cryosphere, 18, 4671–4686, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4671-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4671-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Computer models, like those used in climate change studies, are written by modellers who have to decide how best to construct the models in order to satisfy the purpose they serve. Using snow modelling as an example, we examine the process behind the decisions to understand what motivates or limits modellers in their decision-making. We find that the context in which research is undertaken is often more crucial than scientific limitations. We argue for more transparency in our research practice.
Steven J. Pestana, C. Chris Chickadel, and Jessica D. Lundquist
The Cryosphere, 18, 2257–2276, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-2257-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-2257-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We compared infrared images taken by GOES-R satellites of an area with snow and forests against surface temperature measurements taken on the ground, from an aircraft, and by another satellite. We found that GOES-R measured warmer temperatures than the other measurements, especially in areas with more forest and when the Sun was behind the satellite. From this work, we learned that the position of the Sun and surface features such as trees that can cast shadows impact GOES-R infrared images.
Zachary Hoppinen, Shadi Oveisgharan, Hans-Peter Marshall, Ross Mower, Kelly Elder, and Carrie Vuyovich
The Cryosphere, 18, 575–592, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-575-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-575-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We used changes in radar echo travel time from multiple airborne flights to estimate changes in snow depths across Idaho for two winters. We compared our radar-derived retrievals to snow pits, weather stations, and a 100 m resolution numerical snow model. We had a strong Pearson correlation and root mean squared error of 10 cm relative to in situ measurements. Our retrievals also correlated well with our model, especially in regions of dry snow and low tree coverage.
Dylan Reynolds, Ethan Gutmann, Bert Kruyt, Michael Haugeneder, Tobias Jonas, Franziska Gerber, Michael Lehning, and Rebecca Mott
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5049–5068, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5049-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5049-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The challenge of running geophysical models is often compounded by the question of where to obtain appropriate data to give as input to a model. Here we present the HICAR model, a simplified atmospheric model capable of running at spatial resolutions of hectometers for long time series or over large domains. This makes physically consistent atmospheric data available at the spatial and temporal scales needed for some terrestrial modeling applications, for example seasonal snow forecasting.
Esteban Alonso-González, Ethan Gutmann, Kristoffer Aalstad, Abbas Fayad, Marine Bouchet, and Simon Gascoin
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4455–4471, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4455-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4455-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Snow water resources represent a key hydrological resource for the Mediterranean regions, where most of the precipitation falls during the winter months. This is the case for Lebanon, where snowpack represents 31 % of the spring flow. We have used models to generate snow information corrected by means of remote sensing snow cover retrievals. Our results highlight the high temporal variability in the snowpack in Lebanon and its sensitivity to further warming caused by its hypsography.
Robbie D. C. Mallett, Julienne C. Stroeve, Michel Tsamados, Jack C. Landy, Rosemary Willatt, Vishnu Nandan, and Glen E. Liston
The Cryosphere, 15, 2429–2450, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-2429-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-2429-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We re-estimate pan-Arctic sea ice thickness (SIT) values by combining data from the Envisat and CryoSat-2 missions with data from a new, reanalysis-driven snow model. Because a decreasing amount of ice is being hidden below the waterline by the weight of overlying snow, we argue that SIT may be declining faster than previously calculated in some regions. Because the snow product varies from year to year, our new SIT calculations also display much more year-to-year variability.
Johannes Horak, Marlis Hofer, Ethan Gutmann, Alexander Gohm, and Mathias W. Rotach
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1657–1680, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1657-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1657-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This process-based evaluation of the atmospheric model ICAR is conducted to derive recommendations to increase the likelihood of its results being correct for the right reasons. We conclude that a different diagnosis of the atmospheric background state is necessary, as well as a model top at an elevation of at least 10 km. Alternative boundary conditions at the top were not found to be effective in reducing this model top elevation. The results have wide implications for future ICAR studies.
Rhae Sung Kim, Sujay Kumar, Carrie Vuyovich, Paul Houser, Jessica Lundquist, Lawrence Mudryk, Michael Durand, Ana Barros, Edward J. Kim, Barton A. Forman, Ethan D. Gutmann, Melissa L. Wrzesien, Camille Garnaud, Melody Sandells, Hans-Peter Marshall, Nicoleta Cristea, Justin M. Pflug, Jeremy Johnston, Yueqian Cao, David Mocko, and Shugong Wang
The Cryosphere, 15, 771–791, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-771-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-771-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
High SWE uncertainty is observed in mountainous and forested regions, highlighting the need for high-resolution snow observations in these regions. Substantial uncertainty in snow water storage in Tundra regions and the dominance of water storage in these regions points to the need for high-accuracy snow estimation. Finally, snow measurements during the melt season are most needed at high latitudes, whereas observations at near peak snow accumulations are most beneficial over the midlatitudes.
Lu Zhou, Julienne Stroeve, Shiming Xu, Alek Petty, Rachel Tilling, Mai Winstrup, Philip Rostosky, Isobel R. Lawrence, Glen E. Liston, Andy Ridout, Michel Tsamados, and Vishnu Nandan
The Cryosphere, 15, 345–367, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-345-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-345-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Snow on sea ice plays an important role in the Arctic climate system. Large spatial and temporal discrepancies among the eight snow depth products are analyzed together with their seasonal variability and long-term trends. These snow products are further compared against various ground-truth observations. More analyses on representation error of sea ice parameters are needed for systematic comparison and fusion of airborne, in situ and remote sensing observations.
Xavier Fettweis, Stefan Hofer, Uta Krebs-Kanzow, Charles Amory, Teruo Aoki, Constantijn J. Berends, Andreas Born, Jason E. Box, Alison Delhasse, Koji Fujita, Paul Gierz, Heiko Goelzer, Edward Hanna, Akihiro Hashimoto, Philippe Huybrechts, Marie-Luise Kapsch, Michalea D. King, Christoph Kittel, Charlotte Lang, Peter L. Langen, Jan T. M. Lenaerts, Glen E. Liston, Gerrit Lohmann, Sebastian H. Mernild, Uwe Mikolajewicz, Kameswarrao Modali, Ruth H. Mottram, Masashi Niwano, Brice Noël, Jonathan C. Ryan, Amy Smith, Jan Streffing, Marco Tedesco, Willem Jan van de Berg, Michiel van den Broeke, Roderik S. W. van de Wal, Leo van Kampenhout, David Wilton, Bert Wouters, Florian Ziemen, and Tobias Zolles
The Cryosphere, 14, 3935–3958, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-3935-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-3935-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluated simulated Greenland Ice Sheet surface mass balance from 5 kinds of models. While the most complex (but expensive to compute) models remain the best, the faster/simpler models also compare reliably with observations and have biases of the same order as the regional models. Discrepancies in the trend over 2000–2012, however, suggest that large uncertainties remain in the modelled future SMB changes as they are highly impacted by the meltwater runoff biases over the current climate.
Ankit Pramanik, Jack Kohler, Katrin Lindbäck, Penelope How, Ward Van Pelt, Glen Liston, and Thomas V. Schuler
The Cryosphere Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2020-197, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2020-197, 2020
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
Freshwater discharge from tidewater glaciers influences fjord circulation and fjord ecosystem. Glacier hydrology plays crucial role in transporting water underneath glacier ice. We investigated hydrology beneath the tidewater glaciers of Kongsfjord basin in Northwest Svalbard and found that subglacial water flow differs substantially from surface flow of glacier ice. Furthermore, we derived freshwater discharge time-series from all the glaciers to the fjord.
César Deschamps-Berger, Simon Gascoin, Etienne Berthier, Jeffrey Deems, Ethan Gutmann, Amaury Dehecq, David Shean, and Marie Dumont
The Cryosphere, 14, 2925–2940, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2925-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-2925-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluate a recent method to map snow depth based on satellite photogrammetry. We compare it with accurate airborne laser-scanning measurements in the Sierra Nevada, USA. We find that satellite data capture the relationship between snow depth and elevation at the catchment scale and also small-scale features like snow drifts and avalanche deposits. We conclude that satellite photogrammetry stands out as a convenient method to estimate the spatial distribution of snow depth in high mountains.
Cited articles
Beniston, M.: Climatic Change in Mountain Regions: A Review of Possible Impacts, Climatic Change, 59, 5–31, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024458411589, 2003.
Bernhardt, M., Schulz, K., Liston, G. E., and Zängl, G.: The influence of lateral snow redistribution processes on snow melt and sublimation in alpine regions, J. Hydrol., 424–425, 196–206, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.001, 2012.
Boelman, N. T., Liston, G. E., Gurarie, E., Meddens, A. J. H., Mahoney, P. J., Kirchner, P. B., Bohrer, G., Brinkman, T. J., Cosgrove, C. L., Eitel, J. U. H., Hebblewhite, M., Kimball, J. S., LaPoint, S., Nolin, A. W., Pedersen, S. H., Prugh, L. R., Reinking, A. K., and Vierling, L. A.: Integrating snow science and wildlife ecology in Arctic-boreal North America, Environ. Res. Lett., 14, 010401, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaeec1, 2019.
Clark, M. P. and Hay, L. E.: Use of Medium-Range Numerical Weather Prediction Model Output to Produce Forecasts of Streamflow, J. Hydrometeorol., 5, 15–32, https://doi.org/10.1175/1525-7541(2004)005<0015:Uomnwp>2.0.Co;2, 2004.
Coarfa, C., Dotsenko, Y., Mellor-Crummey, J., Cantonnet, F., El-Ghazawi, T., Mohanti, A., Yao, Y., and Chavarría-Miranda, D.: An evaluation of global address space languages: co-array fortran and unified parallel c, Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGPLAN symposium on Principles and practice of parallel programming, 36–47, https://doi.org/10.1145/1065944.1065950, 2005.
Computational and Information Systems Laboratory: Cheyenne: HPE/SGI ICE XA System (NCAR Community Computing), National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, https://doi.org/10.5065/D6RX99HX, 2019.
Dennis, J. M.: Inverse space-filling curve partitioning of a global ocean model, 2007 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1109/IPDPS.2007.370215, 2007.
Dozier, J., Bair, E. H., and Davis, R. E.: Estimating the spatial distribution of snow water equivalent in the world's mountains, WIREs Water, 3, 461–474, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1140, 2016.
Essery, R., Li, L., and Pomeroy, J.: A distributed model of blowing snow over complex terrain, Hydrol. Process., 13, 2423–2438, https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1085(199910)13:14/15<2423::AID-HYP853>3.0.CO;2-U, 1999.
Fanfarillo, A., Burnus, T., Cardellini, V., Filippone, S., Nagle, D., and Rouson, D.: OpenCoarrays: open-source transport layers supporting coarray Fortran compilers, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Partitioned Global Address Space Programming Models, 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1145/2676870.2676876, 2014.
Fang, X. and Pomeroy, J.: Modeling blowing snow redistribution to prairie wetlands, Hydrol. Process., 23, 2557–2569, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7348, 2009.
Foster, J. L., Hall, D. K., Eylander, J. B., Riggs, G. A., Nghiem, S. V., Tedesco, M., Kim, E., Montesano, P. M., Kelly, R. E. J., Casey, K. A., and Choudhury, B.: A blended global snow product using visible, passive microwave and scatterometer satellite data, Int. J. Remote Sens., 32, 1371–1395, https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160903548013, 2011.
Freudiger, D., Kohn, I., Seibert, J., Stahl, K., and Weiler, M.: Snow redistribution for the hydrological modeling of alpine catchments, WIREs Water, 4, e1232, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1232, 2017.
Gesch, D. B., Evans, G. A., Oimoen, M. J., and Arundel, S.: The National Elevation Dataset, edited by: United States Geological Survey, American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 83–110, 2018.
Hall, D. K., Salomonson, V. V., and Riggs, G. A.: MODIS/Terra Snow Cover 5-Min L2 Swath 500m, Version 5, Boulder, Colorado USA, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center, https://doi.org/10.5067/ACYTYZB9BEOS, 2006.
Hamman, J. J., Nijssen, B., Bohn, T. J., Gergel, D. R., and Mao, Y.: The Variable Infiltration Capacity model version 5 (VIC-5): infrastructure improvements for new applications and reproducibility, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3481–3496, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3481-2018, 2018.
Hammond, J. C., Sexstone, G. A., Putman, A. L., Barnhart, T. B., Rey, D. M., Driscoll, J. M., Liston, G. E., Rasmussen, K. L., McGrath, D., Fassnacht, S. R., and Kampf, S. K.: High Resolution SnowModel Simulations Reveal Future Elevation-Dependent Snow Loss and Earlier, Flashier Surface Water Input for the Upper Colorado River Basin, Earth's Future, 11, e2022EF003092, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022EF003092, 2023.
Homer, C., Dewitz, J., Yang, L., Jin, S., Danielson, P., Xian, G., Coulston, J., Herold, N., Wickham, J., and Megown, K.: Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous United States–representing a decade of land cover change information, Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens., 81, 345–354, 2015.
Hoppinen, Z., Oveisgharan, S., Marshall, H.-P., Mower, R., Elder, K., and Vuyovich, C.: Snow water equivalent retrieval over Idaho – Part 2: Using L-band UAVSAR repeat-pass interferometry, The Cryosphere, 18, 575–592, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-575-2024, 2024.
Huss, M., Bookhagen, B., Huggel, C., Jacobsen, D., Bradley, R. S., Clague, J. J., Vuille, M., Buytaert, W., Cayan, D. R., Greenwood, G., Mark, B. G., Milner, A. M., Weingartner, R., and Winder, M.: Toward mountains without permanent snow and ice, Earth's Future, 5, 418–435, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000514, 2017.
Immerzeel, W. W., Lutz, A. F., Andrade, M., Bahl, A., Biemans, H., Bolch, T., Hyde, S., Brumby, S., Davies, B. J., Elmore, A. C., Emmer, A., Feng, M., Fernández, A., Haritashya, U., Kargel, J. S., Koppes, M., Kraaijenbrink, P. D. A., Kulkarni, A. V., Mayewski, P. A., Nepal, S., Pacheco, P., Painter, T. H., Pellicciotti, F., Rajaram, H., Rupper, S., Sinisalo, A., Shrestha, A. B., Viviroli, D., Wada, Y., Xiao, C., Yao, T., and Baillie, J. E. M.: Importance and vulnerability of the world's water towers, Nature, 577, 364–369, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1822-y, 2020.
ISO/IEC: Fortran Standard 2008, Technical report, Geneva, Switzerland, https://j3-fortran.org/doc/year/10/10-007.pdf (last access: 10 July 2023), 2010.
Jin, S., Homer, C., Yang, L., Danielson, P., Dewitz, J., Li, C., Zhu, Z., Xian, G., and Howard, D.: Overall methodology design for the United States national land cover database 2016 products, Remote Sens., 11, 2971, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11242971, 2019.
Keenan, E., Wever, N., Lenaerts, J. T. M., and Medley, B.: A wind-driven snow redistribution module for Alpine3D v3.3.0: adaptations designed for downscaling ice sheet surface mass balance, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3203–3219, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3203-2023, 2023.
Kumar, V. and Gupta, A.: Analysis of scalability of parallel algorithms and architectures: A survey, Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Supercomputing, 396–405, https://doi.org/10.1006/jpdc.1994.1099, 1991.
Latifovic, R., Homer, C., Ressl, R., Pouliot, D., Hossain, S. N., Colditz, R. R., Olthof, I., Giri, C. P., and Victoria, A.: 20 North American Land-Change Monitoring System, Remote sensing of land use and land cover, CRC Press, 303, https://doi.org/10.1201/b11964-24, 2016.
Lehning, M., Völksch, I., Gustafsson, D., Nguyen, T., Stähli, M., and Zappa, M.: ALPINE3D: A detailed model of mountain surface processes and its application to snow hydrology, Hydrol. Process., 20, 2111–2128, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6204, 2006.
Lehning, M., Löwe, H., Ryser, M., and Raderschall, N.: Inhomogeneous precipitation distribution and snow transport in steep terrain, Water Resour. Res., 44, W07404, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006545, 2008.
Lettenmaier, D. P., Alsdorf, D., Dozier, J., Huffman, G. J., Pan, M., and Wood, E. F.: Inroads of remote sensing into hydrologic science during the WRR era, Water Resour. Res., 51, 7309–7342, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017616, 2015.
Liston, G. E.: Local advection of momentum, heat, and moisture during the melt of patchy snow covers, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 34, 1705–1715, 1995.
Liston, G. E.: Representing Subgrid Snow Cover Heterogeneities in Regional and Global Models, J. Climate, 17, 1381–1397, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<1381:Rsschi>2.0.Co;2, 2004.
Liston, G. E. and Elder, K.: A distributed snow-evolution modeling system (SnowModel), J. Hydrometeorol., 7, 1259–1276, 2006a.
Liston, G. E. and Elder, K.: A Meteorological Distribution System for High-Resolution Terrestrial Modeling (MicroMet), J. Hydrometeorol., 7, 217–234, https://doi.org/10.1175/jhm486.1, 2006b.
Liston, G. E. and Hall, D. K.: An energy-balance model of lake-ice evolution, J. Glaciol., 41, 373–382, 1995.
Liston, G. E. and Hiemstra, C. A.: A simple data assimilation system for complex snow distributions (SnowAssim), J. Hydrometeorol., 9, 989–1004, 2008.
Liston, G. E. and Hiemstra, C. A.: The changing cryosphere: Pan-Arctic snow trends (1979–2009), J. Climate, 24, 5691–5712, 2011.
Liston, G. E. and Mernild, S. H.: Greenland freshwater runoff. Part I: A runoff routing model for glaciated and nonglaciated landscapes (HydroFlow), J. Climate, 25, 5997–6014, 2012.
Liston, G. E. and Sturm, M.: A snow-transport model for complex terrain, J. Glaciol., 44, 498–516, 1998.
Liston, G. E. and Sturm, M.: Global Seasonal-Snow Classification, Version 1, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/99FTCYYYLAQ0, 2021.
Liston, G. E., Winther, J.-G., Bruland, O., Elvehøy, H., and Sand, K.: Below-surface ice melt on the coastal Antarctic ice sheet, J. Glaciol., 45, 273–285, 1999.
Liston, G. E., Haehnel, R. B., Sturm, M., Hiemstra, C. A., Berezovskaya, S., and Tabler, R. D.: Simulating complex snow distributions in windy environments using SnowTran-3D, J. Glaciol., 53, 241–256, 2007.
Liston, G. E., Perham, C. J., Shideler, R. T., and Cheuvront, A. N.: Modeling snowdrift habitat for polar bear dens, Ecol. Model., 320, 114–134, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.09.010, 2016.
Liston, G. E., Polashenski, C., Rösel, A., Itkin, P., King, J., Merkouriadi, I., and Haapala, J.: A distributed snow-evolution model for sea-ice applications (SnowModel), J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 123, 3786–3810, 2018.
Liston, G. E., Itkin, P., Stroeve, J., Tschudi, M., Stewart, J. S., Pedersen, S. H., Reinking, A. K., and Elder, K.: A Lagrangian snow-evolution system for sea-ice applications (SnowModel-LG): Part I – Model description, J. Geophys. Res-Oceans, 125, e2019JC015913, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015913, 2020.
Liston, G. E., Reinking, A. K., and Boleman, N. T.: Daily SnowModel Outputs Covering the ABoVE Core Domain, 3-km Resolution, 1980–2020, ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2105, 2023.
Lund, J., Forster, R. R., Deeb, E. J., Liston, G. E., Skiles, S. M., and Marshall, H.-P.: Interpreting Sentinel-1 SAR Backscatter Signals of Snowpack Surface Melt/Freeze, Warming, and Ripening, through Field Measurements and Physically-Based SnowModel, Remote Sens., 14, 4002, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14164002, 2022.
Mahoney, P. J., Liston, G. E., LaPoint, S., Gurarie, E., Mangipane, B., Wells, A. G., Brinkman, T. J., Eitel, J. U., Hebblewhite, M., and Nolin, A. W.: Navigating snowscapes: scale-dependent responses of mountain sheep to snowpack properties, Ecol. Appl., 28, 1715–1729, 2018.
Marsh, C. B., Pomeroy, J. W., Spiteri, R. J., and Wheater, H. S.: A Finite Volume Blowing Snow Model for Use With Variable Resolution Meshes, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR025307, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR025307, 2020.
Miller, P., Robson, M., El-Masri, B., Barman, R., Zheng, G., Jain, A., and Kalé, L.: Scaling the isam land surface model through parallelization of inter-component data transfer, 2014 43rd International Conference on Parallel Processing, 422–431, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPP.2014.51, 2014.
Mitchell, K. E.: The multi-institution North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS): Utilizing multiple GCIP products and partners in a continental distributed hydrological modeling system, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D07S90, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003823, 2004.
Moody, E. G., King, M. D., Platnick, S., Schaaf, C. B., and Gao, F.: Spatially complete global spectral surface albedos: Value-added datasets derived from Terra MODIS land products, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote Sens., 43, 144–158, 2005.
Morin, S., Horton, S., Techel, F., Bavay, M., Coléou, C., Fierz, C., Gobiet, A., Hagenmuller, P., Lafaysse, M., Ližar, M., Mitterer, C., Monti, F., Müller, K., Olefs, M., Snook, J. S., van Herwijnen, A., and Vionnet, V.: Application of physical snowpack models in support of operational avalanche hazard forecasting: A status report on current implementations and prospects for the future, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., 170, 102910, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2019.102910, 2020.
Mortezapour, M., Menounos, B., Jackson, P. L., Erler, A. R., and Pelto, B. M.: The role of meteorological forcing and snow model complexity in winter glacier mass balance estimation, Columbia River basin, Canada, Hydrol. Process., 34, 5085–5103, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13929, 2020.
Mott, R. and Lehning, M.: Meteorological Modeling of Very High-Resolution Wind Fields and Snow Deposition for Mountains, J. Hydrometeorol., 11, 934–949, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JHM1216.1, 2010.
Mott, R., Schirmer, M., Bavay, M., Grünewald, T., and Lehning, M.: Understanding snow-transport processes shaping the mountain snow-cover, The Cryosphere, 4, 545–559, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-4-545-2010, 2010.
Mower, R.: NCAR/Parallel-SnowModel: Parallel-SnowModel (v1.0.0), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11168392, 2024.
Mower, R., Gutmann, E. D., and Liston, G. E.: Parallel-SnowModel, Github [data set and code], https://github.com/NCAR/Parallel-SnowModel (last access: 31 January 2024), 2023.
Mudryk, L. R., Derksen, C., Kushner, P. J., and Brown, R.: Characterization of Northern Hemisphere Snow Water Equivalent Datasets, 1981–2010, J. Climate, 28, 8037–8051, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-15-0229.1, 2015.
National Operational Hydrologic Remote Sensing Center: Snow Data Assimilation System (SNODAS) Data Products at NSIDC, Version 1, Boulder, Colorado USA, NSIDC: National Snow and Ice Data Center, https://doi.org/10.7265/N5TB14TC, 2004.
Nolin, A. W.: Recent advances in remote sensing of seasonal snow, J. Glaciol., 56, 1141–1150, https://doi.org/10.3189/002214311796406077, 2010.
Numrich, R. W. and Reid, J.: Co-Array Fortran for parallel programming, ACM Sigplan Fortran Forum, 1–31, https://doi.org/10.1145/289918.289920, 1998.
Numrich, R. W., Steidel, J. L., Johnson, B. H., Dinechin, B. D. d., Elsesser, G., Fischer, G., and MacDonald, T.: Definition of the F– Extension to Fortran 90, International Workshop on Languages and Compilers for Parallel Computing, 292–306, https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0032700, 1998.
Painter, T. H., Berisford, D. F., Boardman, J. W., Bormann, K. J., Deems, J. S., Gehrke, F., Hedrick, A., Joyce, M., Laidlaw, R., and Marks, D.: The Airborne Snow Observatory: Fusion of scanning lidar, imaging spectrometer, and physically-based modeling for mapping snow water equivalent and snow albedo, Remote Sens. Environ., 184, 139–152, 2016.
Parhami, B.: SIMD machines: do they have a significant future?, ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News, 23, 19–22, 1995.
Pedersen, S. H., Liston, G. E., Tamstorf, M. P., Westergaard-Nielsen, A., and Schmidt, N. M.: Quantifying Episodic Snowmelt Events in Arctic Ecosystems, Ecosystems, 18, 839–856, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-015-9867-8, 2015.
Pedersen, S. H., Liston, G. E., Tamstorf, M. P., Schmidt, N. M., and Abermann, J.: Linking vegetation greenness and seasonal snow characteristics using field observations, SnowModel, and daily MODIS imagery in high-Arctic Greenland, AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, GC42A-07, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AGUFMGC42A..07P/abstract (last access: 16 October 2023), 2016.
Perezhogin, P., Chernov, I., and Iakovlev, N.: Advanced parallel implementation of the coupled ocean–ice model FEMAO (version 2.0) with load balancing, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 843–857, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-843-2021, 2021.
Pflug, J. M. and Lundquist, J. D.: Inferring Distributed Snow Depth by Leveraging Snow Pattern Repeatability: Investigation Using 47 Lidar Observations in the Tuolumne Watershed, Sierra Nevada, California, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2020WR027243, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR027243, 2020.
Prokop, A. and Schneiderbauer, S.: The atmospheric snow-transport model: SnowDrift3D, J. Glaciol., 57, 526–542, https://doi.org/10.3189/002214311796905677, 2011.
Quéno, L., Mott, R., Morin, P., Cluzet, B., Mazzotti, G., and Jonas, T.: Snow redistribution in an intermediate-complexity snow hydrology modelling framework, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2071, 2023.
Randin, C. F., Dedieu, J.-P., Zappa, M., Long, L., and Dullinger, S.: Validation of and comparison between a semidistributed rainfall–runoff hydrological model (PREVAH) and a spatially distributed snow-evolution model (SnowModel) for snow cover prediction in mountain ecosystems, Ecohydrology, 8, 1181–1193, https://doi.org/10.1002/eco.1570, 2015.
Rasmussen, R. M., Liu, C., Ikeda, K., Chen, F., Kim, J.-H., Schneider, T., Gochis, D., Dugger, A., and Viger, R.: Four-kilometer long-term regional hydroclimate reanalysis over the conterminous United States (CONUS), 1979–2020, Research Data Archive at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Computational and Information Systems Laboratory [data set], https://doi.org/10.5065/ZYY0-Y036, 2023.
Renwick, J.: MOUNTerrain: GEWEX mountainous terrain precipitation project, GEWEX News, 24, 5–6, 2014.
Reynolds, D. S., Pflug, J. M., and Lundquist, J. D.: Evaluating wind fields for use in basin-scale distributed snow models, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR028536, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028536, 2021.
Richter, B., Schweizer, J., Rotach, M. W., and van Herwijnen, A.: Modeling spatially distributed snow instability at a regional scale using Alpine3D, J. Glaciol., 67, 1147–1162, https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2021.61, 2021.
Rouson, D., Gutmann, E. D., Fanfarillo, A., and Friesen, B.: Performance portability of an intermediate-complexity atmospheric research model in coarray Fortran, Proceedings of the Second Annual PGAS Applications Workshop, 1–4, https://doi.org/10.1145/3144779.3169104, 2017.
Skofronick-Jackson, G. M., Johnson, B. T., and Munchak, S. J.: Detection Thresholds of Falling Snow From Satellite-Borne Active and Passive Sensors, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote S., 51, 4177–4189, https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2012.2227763, 2013.
Sturm, M. and Liston, G. E.: Revisiting the global seasonal snow classification: An updated dataset for earth system applications, J. Hydrometeorol., 22, 2917–2938, 2021.
Sturm, M., Holmgren, J., and Liston, G. E.: A Seasonal Snow Cover Classification System for Local to Global Applications, J. Climate, 8, 1261–1283, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1995)008<1261:Assccs>2.0.Co;2, 1995.
Szczypta, C., Gascoin, S., Houet, T., and Fanise, P.: Impact of climate versus land-use changes on snow cover in Bassiès, Pyrenees, International Snow Science Workshop Grenoble â Chamonix Mont-Blanc, 1278–1281, https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:55357771 (last access: 15 January 2024), 2013.
Tabler, R. D.: Estimating the transport and evaporation of blowing snow, Great Plains Agric. Council, Nebraska Univ., Publ., 73, 85–104, 1975.
Takala, M., Luojus, K., Pulliainen, J., Derksen, C., Lemmetyinen, J., Kärnä, J.-P., Koskinen, J., and Bojkov, B.: Estimating northern hemisphere snow water equivalent for climate research through assimilation of space-borne radiometer data and ground-based measurements, Remote Sens. Environ., 115, 3517–3529, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.08.014, 2011.
Tedesco, M. and Jeyaratnam, J.: AMSR-E/AMSR2 Unified L3 Global Daily 25 km EASE-Grid Snow Water Equivalent, Version 1, Boulder, Colorado USA, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center, https://doi.org/10.5067/8AE2ILXB5SM6, 2019.
Vionnet, V., Martin, E., Masson, V., Guyomarc'h, G., Naaim-Bouvet, F., Prokop, A., Durand, Y., and Lac, C.: Simulation of wind-induced snow transport and sublimation in alpine terrain using a fully coupled snowpack/atmosphere model, The Cryosphere, 8, 395–415, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-395-2014, 2014.
Vionnet, V., Martin, E., Masson, V., Lac, C., Naaim Bouvet, F., and Guyomarc'h, G.: High-resolution large eddy simulation of snow accumulation in Alpine terrain, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 11005–11021, 2017.
Voordendag, A., Réveillet, M., MacDonell, S., and Lhermitte, S.: Snow model comparison to simulate snow depth evolution and sublimation at point scale in the semi-arid Andes of Chile, The Cryosphere, 15, 4241–4259, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-4241-2021, 2021.
Vuyovich, C. M., Jacobs, J. M., and Daly, S. F.: Comparison of passive microwave and modeled estimates of total watershed SWE in the continental United States, Water Resour. Res., 50, 9088–9102, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014734, 2014.
Wagner, C., Hunsaker, A., and Jacobs, J.: UAV and SnowModel Estimates of Wind Driven Snow in Eastern USA Avalanche Terrain, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-4608, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-4608, 2023.
Wrzesien, M. L., Durand, M. T., Pavelsky, T. M., Kapnick, S. B., Zhang, Y., Guo, J., and Shum, C. K.: A New Estimate of North American Mountain Snow Accumulation From Regional Climate Model Simulations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 1423–1432, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076664, 2018.
Xia, Y.: Continental-scale water and energy flux analysis and validation for North American Land Data Assimilation System project phase 2 (NLDAS-2): 1. Intercomparison and application of model products, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D03109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016048, 2012a.
Xia, Y.: Continental-scale water and energy flux analysis and validation for North American Land Data Assimilation System project phase 2 (NLDAS-2): 2. Validation of model-simulated streamflow, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D03110, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016051, 2012b.
Xue, M., Droegemeier, K. K., and Wong, V.: The Advanced Regional Prediction System (ARPS) – A multi-scale nonhydrostatic atmospheric simulation and prediction model. Part I: Model dynamics and verification, Meteorol. Atmos. Phys., 75, 161–193, https://doi.org/10.1007/s007030070003, 2000.
Short summary
Higher-resolution model simulations are better at capturing winter snowpack changes across space and time. However, increasing resolution also increases the computational requirements. This work provides an overview of changes made to a distributed snow-evolution modeling system (SnowModel) to allow it to leverage high-performance computing resources. Continental simulations that were previously estimated to take 120 d can now be performed in 5 h.
Higher-resolution model simulations are better at capturing winter snowpack changes across space...
