Articles | Volume 17, issue 18
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7029-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7029-2024
Model evaluation paper
 | 
19 Sep 2024
Model evaluation paper |  | 19 Sep 2024

Atmospheric-river-induced precipitation in California as simulated by the regionally refined Simple Convective Resolving E3SM Atmosphere Model (SCREAM) Version 0

Peter A. Bogenschutz, Jishi Zhang, Qi Tang, and Philip Cameron-Smith

Related authors

Leveraging regional mesh refinement to simulate future climate projections for California using the Simplified Convection-Permitting E3SM Atmosphere Model Version 0
Jishi Zhang, Peter Bogenschutz, Qi Tang, Philip Cameron-smith, and Chengzhu Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3687–3731, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3687-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3687-2024, 2024
Short summary
Improving the representation of shallow cumulus convection with the simplified-higher-order-closure–mass-flux (SHOC+MF v1.0) approach
Maria J. Chinita, Mikael Witte, Marcin J. Kurowski, Joao Teixeira, Kay Suselj, Georgios Matheou, and Peter Bogenschutz
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1909–1924, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1909-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1909-2023, 2023
Short summary
Combining regional mesh refinement with vertically enhanced physics to target marine stratocumulus biases as demonstrated in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1
Peter A. Bogenschutz, Hsiang-He Lee, Qi Tang, and Takanobu Yamaguchi
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 335–352, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-335-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-335-2023, 2023
Short summary
Better calibration of cloud parameterizations and subgrid effects increases the fidelity of the E3SM Atmosphere Model version 1
Po-Lun Ma, Bryce E. Harrop, Vincent E. Larson, Richard B. Neale, Andrew Gettelman, Hugh Morrison, Hailong Wang, Kai Zhang, Stephen A. Klein, Mark D. Zelinka, Yuying Zhang, Yun Qian, Jin-Ho Yoon, Christopher R. Jones, Meng Huang, Sheng-Lun Tai, Balwinder Singh, Peter A. Bogenschutz, Xue Zheng, Wuyin Lin, Johannes Quaas, Hélène Chepfer, Michael A. Brunke, Xubin Zeng, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Samson Hagos, Zhibo Zhang, Hua Song, Xiaohong Liu, Michael S. Pritchard, Hui Wan, Jingyu Wang, Qi Tang, Peter M. Caldwell, Jiwen Fan, Larry K. Berg, Jerome D. Fast, Mark A. Taylor, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Shaocheng Xie, Philip J. Rasch, and L. Ruby Leung
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2881–2916, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2881-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2881-2022, 2022
Short summary
The E3SM version 1 single-column model
Peter A. Bogenschutz, Shuaiqi Tang, Peter M. Caldwell, Shaocheng Xie, Wuyin Lin, and Yao-Sheng Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4443–4458, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4443-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4443-2020, 2020
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Accurate space-based NOx emission estimates with the flux divergence approach require fine-scale model information on local oxidation chemistry and profile shapes
Felipe Cifuentes, Henk Eskes, Enrico Dammers, Charlotte Bryan, and Folkert Boersma
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 621–649, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025, 2025
Short summary
Exploring a high-level programming model for the NWP domain using ECMWF microphysics schemes
Stefano Ubbiali, Christian Kühnlein, Christoph Schär, Linda Schlemmer, Thomas C. Schulthess, Michael Staneker, and Heini Wernli
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 529–546, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantifying uncertainties in satellite NO2 superobservations for data assimilation and model evaluation
Pieter Rijsdijk, Henk Eskes, Arlene Dingemans, K. Folkert Boersma, Takashi Sekiya, Kazuyuki Miyazaki, and Sander Houweling
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 483–509, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025, 2025
Short summary
ML-AMPSIT: Machine Learning-based Automated Multi-method Parameter Sensitivity and Importance analysis Tool
Dario Di Santo, Cenlin He, Fei Chen, and Lorenzo Giovannini
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 433–459, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025, 2025
Short summary
Coupling the urban canopy model TEB (SURFEXv9.0) with the radiation model SPARTACUS-Urbanv0.6.1 for more realistic urban radiative exchange calculation
Robert Schoetter, Robin James Hogan, Cyril Caliot, and Valéry Masson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 405–431, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Bales, R. C., Battles, J. J., Chen, Y., Conklin, M. H., Holst, E., O’Hara, K. L., Saksa, P., and Stewart, W.: Forests and water in the Sierra Nevada: Sierra Nevada watershed ecosystem enhancement project, Sierra Nevada Research Institute report, Vol. 11, https://forests.berkeley.edu/sites/forests.berkeley.edu/files/146199.pdf (last access: 13 September 2024), 2011. 
Benedict, J. J., Clement, A. C., and Medeiros, B.: Atmospheric blocking and other large-scale precursor patterns of landfalling atmospheric rivers in the North Pacific: A CESM2 study, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 11330–11353, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030790, 2019. 
Bogenschutz, P.: Code and Data for Atmospheric River Induced Precipitation in California as Simulated by the Regionally Refined Simple Convective Resolving E3SM Atmosphere Model Version 0, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10836035, 2024. 
Bogenschutz, P. and Krueger, S. K.: A simplified PDF parameterization of subgrid-scale clouds and turbulence for cloud-resolving models, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 5, 195–211, https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20018, 2013. 
Bogenschutz, P. A., Yamaguchi, T., and Lee, H.-H.: The Energy Exascale Earth System Model simulations With high vertical resolution in the lower troposphere, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2020MS002239, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002239, 2021. 
Download
Short summary
Using high-resolution and state-of-the-art modeling techniques we simulate five atmospheric river events for California to test the capability to represent precipitation for these events. We find that our model is able to capture the distribution of precipitation very well but suffers from overestimating the precipitation amounts over high elevation. Increasing the resolution further has no impact on reducing this bias, while increasing the domain size does have modest impacts.
Share