Articles | Volume 16, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-61-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-61-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
06 Jan 2022
Research article |
| 06 Jan 2022
| 06 Jan 2022
Assimilation of sea ice thickness derived from CryoSat-2 along-track freeboard measurements into the Met Office's Forecast Ocean Assimilation Model (FOAM)
Emma K. Fiedler
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Met Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
Matthew J. Martin
Met Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
Ed Blockley
Met Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
Davi Mignac
Met Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
Nicolas Fournier
Met Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK
Andy Ridout
Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
Andrew Shepherd
Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
Rachel Tilling
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA
Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA
Related authors
Ed Blockley, Emma Fiedler, Jeff Ridley, Luke Roberts, Alex West, Dan Copsey, Daniel Feltham, Tim Graham, David Livings, Clement Rousset, David Schroeder, and Martin Vancoppenolle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6799–6817, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6799-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6799-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper documents the sea ice model component of the latest Met Office coupled model configuration, which will be used as the physical basis for UK contributions to CMIP7. Documentation of science options used in the configuration are given along with a brief model evaluation. This is the first UK configuration to use NEMO’s new SI3 sea ice model. We provide details on how SI3 was adapted to work with Met Office coupling methodology and documentation of coupling processes in the model.
Jozef Skákala, David Ford, Keith Haines, Amos Lawless, Matthew J. Martin, Philip Browne, Marcin Chrust, Stefano Ciavatta, Alison Fowler, Daniel Lea, Matthew Palmer, Andrea Rochner, Jennifer Waters, Hao Zuo, Deep S. Banerjee, Mike Bell, Davi M. Carneiro, Yumeng Chen, Susan Kay, Dale Partridge, Martin Price, Richard Renshaw, Georgy Shapiro, and James While
Ocean Sci., 21, 1709–1734, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-21-1709-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-21-1709-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
UK marine data assimilation (MDA) involves a closely collaborating research community. In this paper, we offer both an overview of the state of the art and a vision for the future across all of the main areas of UK MDA, ranging from physics to biogeochemistry to coupled DA. We discuss the current UK MDA stakeholder applications, highlight theoretical developments needed to advance our systems, and reflect upon upcoming opportunities with respect to hardware and observational missions.
Forrest M. Hoffman, Birgit Hassler, Ranjini Swaminathan, Jared Lewis, Bouwe Andela, Nathaniel Collier, Dóra Hegedűs, Jiwoo Lee, Charlotte Pascoe, Mika Pflüger, Martina Stockhause, Paul Ullrich, Min Xu, Lisa Bock, Felicity Chun, Bettina K. Gier, Douglas I. Kelley, Axel Lauer, Julien Lenhardt, Manuel Schlund, Mohanan G. Sreeush, Katja Weigel, Ed Blockley, Rebecca Beadling, Romain Beucher, Demiso D. Dugassa, Valerio Lembo, Jianhua Lu, Swen Brands, Jerry Tjiputra, Elizaveta Malinina, Brian Mederios, Enrico Scoccimarro, Jeremy Walton, Philip Kershaw, André L. Marquez, Malcolm J. Roberts, Eleanor O’Rourke, Elisabeth Dingley, Briony Turner, Helene Hewitt, and John P. Dunne
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
As Earth system models become more complex, rapid and comprehensive evaluation through comparison with observational data is necessary. The upcoming Assessment Fast Track for the Seventh Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7) will require fast analysis. This paper describes a new Rapid Evaluation Framework (REF) that was developed for the Assessment Fast Track that will be run at the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) to inform the community about the performance of models.
Davi Mignac, Jennifer Waters, Daniel J. Lea, Matthew J. Martin, James While, Anthony T. Weaver, Arthur Vidard, Catherine Guiavarc'h, Dave Storkey, David Ford, Edward W. Blockley, Jonathan Baker, Keith Haines, Martin R. Price, Michael J. Bell, and Richard Renshaw
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3405–3425, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3405-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3405-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We describe major improvements of the Met Office's global ocean–sea ice forecasting system. The models and the way observations are used to improve the forecasts were changed, which led to a significant error reduction of 1 d forecasts. The new system performance in past conditions, where subsurface observations are scarce, was improved with more consistent ocean heat content estimates. The new system will be of better use for climate studies and will provide improved forecasts for end users.
Matthew J. Martin, Ibrahim Hoteit, Laurent Bertino, and Andrew M. Moore
State Planet, 5-opsr, 9, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-9-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-9-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Observations of the ocean from satellites and platforms in the ocean are combined with information from computer models to produce predictions of how the ocean temperature, salinity, and currents will evolve over the coming days and weeks and to describe how the ocean has evolved in the past. This paper summarises the methods used to produce these ocean forecasts at various centres around the world and outlines the practical considerations for implementing such forecasting systems.
Laurent Bertino, Patrick Heimbach, Ed Blockley, and Einar Ólason
State Planet, 5-opsr, 14, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-14-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-14-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasts of sea ice are in high demand in the polar regions, and they are also quickly improving and becoming more easily accessible to non-experts. We provide here a brief status of the short-term forecasting services – typically 10 d ahead – and an outlook of their upcoming developments.
Yann Drillet, Matthew Martin, Yosuke Fujii, Eric Chassignet, and Stefania Ciliberti
State Planet, 5-opsr, 2, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-2-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-2-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This article describes the various stages of research and development that have been carried out over the last few decades to produce an operational reference service for global ocean monitoring and forecasting.
Michael J. Bell, Andreas Schiller, and Stefania Ciliberti
State Planet, 5-opsr, 10, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-10-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-10-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We provide an introduction to physical ocean models, at elementary and intermediate levels, describing the properties they represent, the principles and equations they use to evolve these properties, the physical phenomena they simulate, and the wider context and prospects for their further development. We also outline, at a more technical level, the methods and approximations that they use and the difficulties that limit their accuracy or reliability.
Alex E. West and Edward W. Blockley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3041–3064, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3041-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3041-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses ice mass balance buoys – temperature- and height-measuring devices frozen into sea ice – to find how well climate models simulate (1) melt and growth of Arctic sea ice and (2) conduction of heat through Arctic sea ice. This may help understand why models produce varying amounts of sea ice in the present day. We find that models tend to show more melt, growth or conduction for a given ice thickness than the buoys, although the difference is smaller for models with more physically realistic thermodynamics.
Amy E. Swiggs, Isobel R. Lawrence, and Andrew Shepherd
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-693, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-693, 2025
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
We produce a new sea ice concentration product in the Canadian Arctic. This region is vital for shipping, sea ice dependent species, and the movement of sea ice and freshwater. We find that the new dataset agrees well with existing sensors. As it is sensitive to leads, it can detect fine-scale sea ice features, and generally resolves a lower sea ice concentration for this reason. This different approach is important for monitoring sea ice dynamics in a changing climate.
Catherine Guiavarc'h, David Storkey, Adam T. Blaker, Ed Blockley, Alex Megann, Helene Hewitt, Michael J. Bell, Daley Calvert, Dan Copsey, Bablu Sinha, Sophia Moreton, Pierre Mathiot, and Bo An
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 377–403, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-377-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-377-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Ocean and Sea Ice configuration version 9 (GOSI9) is the new UK hierarchy of model configurations based on the Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean (NEMO) and available at three resolutions. It will be used for various applications, e.g. weather forecasting and climate prediction. It improves upon the previous version by reducing global temperature and salinity biases and enhancing the representation of Arctic sea ice and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.
Robert R. King, Matthew J. Martin, Lucile Gaultier, Jennifer Waters, Clément Ubelmann, and Craig Donlon
Ocean Sci., 20, 1657–1676, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-20-1657-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-20-1657-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We use simulations of our ocean forecasting system to compare the impact of additional altimeter observations from two proposed future satellite constellations. We found that, in our system, an altimeter constellation of 12 nadir altimeters produces improved predictions of sea surface height, surface currents, temperature, and salinity compared to a constellation of 2 wide-swath altimeters.
Colin G. Jones, Fanny Adloff, Ben B. B. Booth, Peter M. Cox, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, Katja Frieler, Helene T. Hewitt, Hazel A. Jeffery, Sylvie Joussaume, Torben Koenigk, Bryan N. Lawrence, Eleanor O'Rourke, Malcolm J. Roberts, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Samuel Somot, Pier Luigi Vidale, Detlef van Vuuren, Mario Acosta, Mats Bentsen, Raffaele Bernardello, Richard Betts, Ed Blockley, Julien Boé, Tom Bracegirdle, Pascale Braconnot, Victor Brovkin, Carlo Buontempo, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Markus Donat, Italo Epicoco, Pete Falloon, Sandro Fiore, Thomas Frölicher, Neven S. Fučkar, Matthew J. Gidden, Helge F. Goessling, Rune Grand Graversen, Silvio Gualdi, José M. Gutiérrez, Tatiana Ilyina, Daniela Jacob, Chris D. Jones, Martin Juckes, Elizabeth Kendon, Erik Kjellström, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Michael Obersteiner, Pierre Regnier, Romain Roehrig, David Salas y Mélia, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Michael Schulz, Enrico Scoccimarro, Laurent Terray, Hannes Thiemann, Richard A. Wood, Shuting Yang, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1319–1351, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a number of priority areas for the international climate research community to address over the coming decade. Advances in these areas will both increase our understanding of past and future Earth system change, including the societal and environmental impacts of this change, and deliver significantly improved scientific support to international climate policy, such as future IPCC assessments and the UNFCCC Global Stocktake.
Renée M. Fredensborg Hansen, Henriette Skourup, Eero Rinne, Arttu Jutila, Isobel R. Lawrence, Andrew Shepherd, Knut V. Høyland, Jilu Li, Fernando Rodriguez-Morales, Sebastian B. Simonsen, Jeremy Wilkinson, Gaelle Veyssiere, Donghui Yi, René Forsberg, and Taniâ G. D. Casal
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2854, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2854, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In December 2022, an airborne campaign collected unprecedented coincident multi-frequency radar and lidar data over sea ice along a CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 (CRYO2ICE) orbit in the Weddell Sea useful for evaluating microwave penetration. We found limited snow penetration at Ka- and Ku-bands, with significant contributions from the air-snow interface, contradicting traditional assumptions. These findings challenge current methods for comparing air- and spaceborne altimeter estimates of sea ice.
Ed Blockley, Emma Fiedler, Jeff Ridley, Luke Roberts, Alex West, Dan Copsey, Daniel Feltham, Tim Graham, David Livings, Clement Rousset, David Schroeder, and Martin Vancoppenolle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6799–6817, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6799-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6799-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper documents the sea ice model component of the latest Met Office coupled model configuration, which will be used as the physical basis for UK contributions to CMIP7. Documentation of science options used in the configuration are given along with a brief model evaluation. This is the first UK configuration to use NEMO’s new SI3 sea ice model. We provide details on how SI3 was adapted to work with Met Office coupling methodology and documentation of coupling processes in the model.
Michael Studinger, Benjamin E. Smith, Nathan Kurtz, Alek Petty, Tyler Sutterley, and Rachel Tilling
The Cryosphere, 18, 2625–2652, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-2625-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-2625-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We use green lidar data and natural-color imagery over sea ice to quantify elevation biases potentially impacting estimates of change in ice thickness of the polar regions. We complement our analysis using a model of scattering of light in snow and ice that predicts the shape of lidar waveforms reflecting from snow and ice surfaces based on the shape of the transmitted pulse. We find that biased elevations exist in airborne and spaceborne data products from green lidars.
Trystan Surawy-Stepney, Anna E. Hogg, Stephen L. Cornford, Benjamin J. Wallis, Benjamin J. Davison, Heather L. Selley, Ross A. W. Slater, Elise K. Lie, Livia Jakob, Andrew Ridout, Noel Gourmelen, Bryony I. D. Freer, Sally F. Wilson, and Andrew Shepherd
The Cryosphere, 18, 977–993, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-977-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-977-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Here, we use satellite observations and an ice flow model to quantify the impact of sea ice buttressing on ice streams on the Antarctic Peninsula. The evacuation of 11-year-old landfast sea ice in the Larsen B embayment on the East Antarctic Peninsula in January 2022 was closely followed by major changes in the calving behaviour and acceleration (30 %) of the ocean-terminating glaciers. Our results show that sea ice buttressing had a negligible direct role in the observed dynamic changes.
Hélène Seroussi, Vincent Verjans, Sophie Nowicki, Antony J. Payne, Heiko Goelzer, William H. Lipscomb, Ayako Abe-Ouchi, Cécile Agosta, Torsten Albrecht, Xylar Asay-Davis, Alice Barthel, Reinhard Calov, Richard Cullather, Christophe Dumas, Benjamin K. Galton-Fenzi, Rupert Gladstone, Nicholas R. Golledge, Jonathan M. Gregory, Ralf Greve, Tore Hattermann, Matthew J. Hoffman, Angelika Humbert, Philippe Huybrechts, Nicolas C. Jourdain, Thomas Kleiner, Eric Larour, Gunter R. Leguy, Daniel P. Lowry, Chistopher M. Little, Mathieu Morlighem, Frank Pattyn, Tyler Pelle, Stephen F. Price, Aurélien Quiquet, Ronja Reese, Nicole-Jeanne Schlegel, Andrew Shepherd, Erika Simon, Robin S. Smith, Fiammetta Straneo, Sainan Sun, Luke D. Trusel, Jonas Van Breedam, Peter Van Katwyk, Roderik S. W. van de Wal, Ricarda Winkelmann, Chen Zhao, Tong Zhang, and Thomas Zwinger
The Cryosphere, 17, 5197–5217, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5197-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5197-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Mass loss from Antarctica is a key contributor to sea level rise over the 21st century, and the associated uncertainty dominates sea level projections. We highlight here the Antarctic glaciers showing the largest changes and quantify the main sources of uncertainty in their future evolution using an ensemble of ice flow models. We show that on top of Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers, Totten and Moscow University glaciers show rapid changes and a strong sensitivity to warmer ocean conditions.
Anne Braakmann-Folgmann, Andrew Shepherd, David Hogg, and Ella Redmond
The Cryosphere, 17, 4675–4690, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-4675-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-4675-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we propose a deep neural network to map the extent of giant Antarctic icebergs in Sentinel-1 images automatically. While each manual delineation requires several minutes, our U-net takes less than 0.01 s. In terms of accuracy, we find that U-net outperforms two standard segmentation techniques (Otsu, k-means) in most metrics and is more robust to challenging scenes with sea ice, coast and other icebergs. The absolute median deviation in iceberg area across 191 images is 4.1 %.
Nicholas Williams, Nicholas Byrne, Daniel Feltham, Peter Jan Van Leeuwen, Ross Bannister, David Schroeder, Andrew Ridout, and Lars Nerger
The Cryosphere, 17, 2509–2532, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2509-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2509-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Observations show that the Arctic sea ice cover has reduced over the last 40 years. This study uses ensemble-based data assimilation in a stand-alone sea ice model to investigate the impacts of assimilating three different kinds of sea ice observation, including the novel assimilation of sea ice thickness distribution. We show that assimilating ice thickness distribution has a positive impact on thickness and volume estimates within the ice pack, especially for very thick ice.
Inès N. Otosaka, Andrew Shepherd, Erik R. Ivins, Nicole-Jeanne Schlegel, Charles Amory, Michiel R. van den Broeke, Martin Horwath, Ian Joughin, Michalea D. King, Gerhard Krinner, Sophie Nowicki, Anthony J. Payne, Eric Rignot, Ted Scambos, Karen M. Simon, Benjamin E. Smith, Louise S. Sørensen, Isabella Velicogna, Pippa L. Whitehouse, Geruo A, Cécile Agosta, Andreas P. Ahlstrøm, Alejandro Blazquez, William Colgan, Marcus E. Engdahl, Xavier Fettweis, Rene Forsberg, Hubert Gallée, Alex Gardner, Lin Gilbert, Noel Gourmelen, Andreas Groh, Brian C. Gunter, Christopher Harig, Veit Helm, Shfaqat Abbas Khan, Christoph Kittel, Hannes Konrad, Peter L. Langen, Benoit S. Lecavalier, Chia-Chun Liang, Bryant D. Loomis, Malcolm McMillan, Daniele Melini, Sebastian H. Mernild, Ruth Mottram, Jeremie Mouginot, Johan Nilsson, Brice Noël, Mark E. Pattle, William R. Peltier, Nadege Pie, Mònica Roca, Ingo Sasgen, Himanshu V. Save, Ki-Weon Seo, Bernd Scheuchl, Ernst J. O. Schrama, Ludwig Schröder, Sebastian B. Simonsen, Thomas Slater, Giorgio Spada, Tyler C. Sutterley, Bramha Dutt Vishwakarma, Jan Melchior van Wessem, David Wiese, Wouter van der Wal, and Bert Wouters
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 1597–1616, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1597-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1597-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
By measuring changes in the volume, gravitational attraction, and ice flow of Greenland and Antarctica from space, we can monitor their mass gain and loss over time. Here, we present a new record of the Earth’s polar ice sheet mass balance produced by aggregating 50 satellite-based estimates of ice sheet mass change. This new assessment shows that the ice sheets have lost (7.5 x 1012) t of ice between 1992 and 2020, contributing 21 mm to sea level rise.
Karina von Schuckmann, Audrey Minière, Flora Gues, Francisco José Cuesta-Valero, Gottfried Kirchengast, Susheel Adusumilli, Fiammetta Straneo, Michaël Ablain, Richard P. Allan, Paul M. Barker, Hugo Beltrami, Alejandro Blazquez, Tim Boyer, Lijing Cheng, John Church, Damien Desbruyeres, Han Dolman, Catia M. Domingues, Almudena García-García, Donata Giglio, John E. Gilson, Maximilian Gorfer, Leopold Haimberger, Maria Z. Hakuba, Stefan Hendricks, Shigeki Hosoda, Gregory C. Johnson, Rachel Killick, Brian King, Nicolas Kolodziejczyk, Anton Korosov, Gerhard Krinner, Mikael Kuusela, Felix W. Landerer, Moritz Langer, Thomas Lavergne, Isobel Lawrence, Yuehua Li, John Lyman, Florence Marti, Ben Marzeion, Michael Mayer, Andrew H. MacDougall, Trevor McDougall, Didier Paolo Monselesan, Jan Nitzbon, Inès Otosaka, Jian Peng, Sarah Purkey, Dean Roemmich, Kanako Sato, Katsunari Sato, Abhishek Savita, Axel Schweiger, Andrew Shepherd, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Leon Simons, Donald A. Slater, Thomas Slater, Andrea K. Steiner, Toshio Suga, Tanguy Szekely, Wim Thiery, Mary-Louise Timmermans, Inne Vanderkelen, Susan E. Wjiffels, Tonghua Wu, and Michael Zemp
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 1675–1709, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1675-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1675-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Earth's climate is out of energy balance, and this study quantifies how much heat has consequently accumulated over the past decades (ocean: 89 %, land: 6 %, cryosphere: 4 %, atmosphere: 1 %). Since 1971, this accumulated heat reached record values at an increasing pace. The Earth heat inventory provides a comprehensive view on the status and expectation of global warming, and we call for an implementation of this global climate indicator into the Paris Agreement’s Global Stocktake.
Jane P. Mulcahy, Colin G. Jones, Steven T. Rumbold, Till Kuhlbrodt, Andrea J. Dittus, Edward W. Blockley, Andrew Yool, Jeremy Walton, Catherine Hardacre, Timothy Andrews, Alejandro Bodas-Salcedo, Marc Stringer, Lee de Mora, Phil Harris, Richard Hill, Doug Kelley, Eddy Robertson, and Yongming Tang
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1569–1600, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1569-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1569-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Recent global climate models simulate historical global mean surface temperatures which are too cold, possibly to due to excessive aerosol cooling. This raises questions about the models' ability to simulate important climate processes and reduces confidence in future climate predictions. We present a new version of the UK Earth System Model, which has an improved aerosols simulation and a historical temperature record. Interestingly, the long-term response to CO2 remains largely unchanged.
Alex West, Edward Blockley, and Matthew Collins
The Cryosphere, 16, 4013–4032, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4013-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4013-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we explore a method of examining model differences in ice volume by looking at the seasonal ice growth and melt. We use simple physical relationships to judge how model differences in key variables affect ice growth and melt and apply these to three case study models with ice volume ranging from very thin to very thick. Results suggest that differences in snow and melt pond cover in early summer are most important in causing the sea ice differences for these models.
Martin Horwath, Benjamin D. Gutknecht, Anny Cazenave, Hindumathi Kulaiappan Palanisamy, Florence Marti, Ben Marzeion, Frank Paul, Raymond Le Bris, Anna E. Hogg, Inès Otosaka, Andrew Shepherd, Petra Döll, Denise Cáceres, Hannes Müller Schmied, Johnny A. Johannessen, Jan Even Øie Nilsen, Roshin P. Raj, René Forsberg, Louise Sandberg Sørensen, Valentina R. Barletta, Sebastian B. Simonsen, Per Knudsen, Ole Baltazar Andersen, Heidi Ranndal, Stine K. Rose, Christopher J. Merchant, Claire R. Macintosh, Karina von Schuckmann, Kristin Novotny, Andreas Groh, Marco Restano, and Jérôme Benveniste
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 411–447, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-411-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-411-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Global mean sea-level change observed from 1993 to 2016 (mean rate of 3.05 mm yr−1) matches the combined effect of changes in water density (thermal expansion) and ocean mass. Ocean-mass change has been assessed through the contributions from glaciers, ice sheets, and land water storage or directly from satellite data since 2003. Our budget assessments of linear trends and monthly anomalies utilise new datasets and uncertainty characterisations developed within ESA's Climate Change Initiative.
Robert R. King and Matthew J. Martin
Ocean Sci., 17, 1791–1813, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-1791-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-1791-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The SWOT satellite will provide a step change in our ability to measure the sea surface height over large areas, and so improve operational ocean forecasts, but will be affected by large correlated errors. We found that while SWOT observations without these errors significantly improved our system, including correlated errors degraded most variables. To realise the full benefits offered by the SWOT mission, we must develop methods to account for correlated errors in ocean forecasting systems.
Anne Braakmann-Folgmann, Andrew Shepherd, and Andy Ridout
The Cryosphere, 15, 3861–3876, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-3861-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-3861-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the disintegration of the B30 iceberg using satellite remote sensing and find that the iceberg lost 378 km3 of ice in 6.5 years, corresponding to 80 % of its initial volume. About two thirds are due to fragmentation at the sides, and one third is due to melting at the iceberg’s base. The release of fresh water and nutrients impacts ocean circulation, sea ice formation, and biological production. We show that adding a snow layer is important when deriving iceberg thickness.
Andrew Yool, Julien Palmiéri, Colin G. Jones, Lee de Mora, Till Kuhlbrodt, Ekatarina E. Popova, A. J. George Nurser, Joel Hirschi, Adam T. Blaker, Andrew C. Coward, Edward W. Blockley, and Alistair A. Sellar
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3437–3472, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3437-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3437-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The ocean plays a key role in modulating the Earth’s climate. Understanding this role is critical when using models to project future climate change. Consequently, it is necessary to evaluate their realism against the ocean's observed state. Here we validate UKESM1, a new Earth system model, focusing on the realism of its ocean physics and circulation, as well as its biological cycles and productivity. While we identify biases, generally the model performs well over a wide range of properties.
Ann Keen, Ed Blockley, David A. Bailey, Jens Boldingh Debernard, Mitchell Bushuk, Steve Delhaye, David Docquier, Daniel Feltham, François Massonnet, Siobhan O'Farrell, Leandro Ponsoni, José M. Rodriguez, David Schroeder, Neil Swart, Takahiro Toyoda, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Martin Vancoppenolle, and Klaus Wyser
The Cryosphere, 15, 951–982, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-951-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-951-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We compare the mass budget of the Arctic sea ice in a number of the latest climate models. New output has been defined that allows us to compare the processes of sea ice growth and loss in a more detailed way than has previously been possible. We find that that the models are strikingly similar in terms of the major processes causing the annual growth and loss of Arctic sea ice and that the budget terms respond in a broadly consistent way as the climate warms during the 21st century.
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.
Thomas Slater, Isobel R. Lawrence, Inès N. Otosaka, Andrew Shepherd, Noel Gourmelen, Livia Jakob, Paul Tepes, Lin Gilbert, and Peter Nienow
The Cryosphere, 15, 233–246, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-233-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-233-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite observations are the best method for tracking ice loss, because the cryosphere is vast and remote. Using these, and some numerical models, we show that Earth has lost 28 trillion tonnes (Tt) of ice since 1994 from Arctic sea ice (7.6 Tt), ice shelves (6.5 Tt), mountain glaciers (6.1 Tt), the Greenland (3.8 Tt) and Antarctic ice sheets (2.5 Tt), and Antarctic sea ice (0.9 Tt). It has taken just 3.2 % of the excess energy Earth has absorbed due to climate warming to cause this ice loss.
Alex West, Mat Collins, and Ed Blockley
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4845–4868, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4845-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4845-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This study calculates sea ice energy fluxes from data produced by ice mass balance buoys (devices measuring ice elevation and temperature). It is shown how the resulting dataset can be used to evaluate a coupled climate model (HadGEM2-ES), with biases in the energy fluxes seen to be consistent with biases in the sea ice state and surface radiation. This method has potential to improve sea ice model evaluation, so as to better understand spread in model simulations of sea ice state.
Heiko Goelzer, Sophie Nowicki, Anthony Payne, Eric Larour, Helene Seroussi, William H. Lipscomb, Jonathan Gregory, Ayako Abe-Ouchi, Andrew Shepherd, Erika Simon, Cécile Agosta, Patrick Alexander, Andy Aschwanden, Alice Barthel, Reinhard Calov, Christopher Chambers, Youngmin Choi, Joshua Cuzzone, Christophe Dumas, Tamsin Edwards, Denis Felikson, Xavier Fettweis, Nicholas R. Golledge, Ralf Greve, Angelika Humbert, Philippe Huybrechts, Sebastien Le clec'h, Victoria Lee, Gunter Leguy, Chris Little, Daniel P. Lowry, Mathieu Morlighem, Isabel Nias, Aurelien Quiquet, Martin Rückamp, Nicole-Jeanne Schlegel, Donald A. Slater, Robin S. Smith, Fiamma Straneo, Lev Tarasov, Roderik van de Wal, and Michiel van den Broeke
The Cryosphere, 14, 3071–3096, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-3071-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-3071-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper we use a large ensemble of Greenland ice sheet models forced by six different global climate models to project ice sheet changes and sea-level rise contributions over the 21st century.
The results for two different greenhouse gas concentration scenarios indicate that the Greenland ice sheet will continue to lose mass until 2100, with contributions to sea-level rise of 90 ± 50 mm and 32 ± 17 mm for the high (RCP8.5) and low (RCP2.6) scenario, respectively.
Hélène Seroussi, Sophie Nowicki, Antony J. Payne, Heiko Goelzer, William H. Lipscomb, Ayako Abe-Ouchi, Cécile Agosta, Torsten Albrecht, Xylar Asay-Davis, Alice Barthel, Reinhard Calov, Richard Cullather, Christophe Dumas, Benjamin K. Galton-Fenzi, Rupert Gladstone, Nicholas R. Golledge, Jonathan M. Gregory, Ralf Greve, Tore Hattermann, Matthew J. Hoffman, Angelika Humbert, Philippe Huybrechts, Nicolas C. Jourdain, Thomas Kleiner, Eric Larour, Gunter R. Leguy, Daniel P. Lowry, Chistopher M. Little, Mathieu Morlighem, Frank Pattyn, Tyler Pelle, Stephen F. Price, Aurélien Quiquet, Ronja Reese, Nicole-Jeanne Schlegel, Andrew Shepherd, Erika Simon, Robin S. Smith, Fiammetta Straneo, Sainan Sun, Luke D. Trusel, Jonas Van Breedam, Roderik S. W. van de Wal, Ricarda Winkelmann, Chen Zhao, Tong Zhang, and Thomas Zwinger
The Cryosphere, 14, 3033–3070, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-3033-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-3033-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Antarctic ice sheet has been losing mass over at least the past 3 decades in response to changes in atmospheric and oceanic conditions. This study presents an ensemble of model simulations of the Antarctic evolution over the 2015–2100 period based on various ice sheet models, climate forcings and emission scenarios. Results suggest that the West Antarctic ice sheet will continue losing a large amount of ice, while the East Antarctic ice sheet could experience increased snow accumulation.
Karina von Schuckmann, Lijing Cheng, Matthew D. Palmer, James Hansen, Caterina Tassone, Valentin Aich, Susheel Adusumilli, Hugo Beltrami, Tim Boyer, Francisco José Cuesta-Valero, Damien Desbruyères, Catia Domingues, Almudena García-García, Pierre Gentine, John Gilson, Maximilian Gorfer, Leopold Haimberger, Masayoshi Ishii, Gregory C. Johnson, Rachel Killick, Brian A. King, Gottfried Kirchengast, Nicolas Kolodziejczyk, John Lyman, Ben Marzeion, Michael Mayer, Maeva Monier, Didier Paolo Monselesan, Sarah Purkey, Dean Roemmich, Axel Schweiger, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Andrew Shepherd, Donald A. Slater, Andrea K. Steiner, Fiammetta Straneo, Mary-Louise Timmermans, and Susan E. Wijffels
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2013–2041, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2013-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2013-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding how much and where the heat is distributed in the Earth system is fundamental to understanding how this affects warming oceans, atmosphere and land, rising temperatures and sea level, and loss of grounded and floating ice, which are fundamental concerns for society. This study is a Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) concerted international effort to obtain the Earth heat inventory over the period 1960–2018.
Cited articles
Aaboe, S., Down E. J., and Eastwood, S.: Product User Manual for the Global
sea-ice edge and type Product, Product User Manual SAF/OSI/CDOP3/MET-Norway/TEC/MA/205, Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility, Norwegian Meteorological Institute, available at: https://osisaf-hl.met.no/sites/osisaf-hl/files/user_manuals/osisaf_cdop3_ss2_pum_sea-ice-edge-type_v3p2.pdf (last access: 16 December 2021), 2021. a, b
Alexandrov, V., Sandven, S., Wahlin, J., and Johannessen, O. M.: The relation
between sea ice thickness and freeboard in the Arctic, The Cryosphere, 4,
373–380, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-4-373-2010, 2010.
a
Allard, R., Metzger, E., Barton, N., Li, L., Kurtz, N., Phelps, M., Franklin,
D., Smedstad, O. M., Crout, J., and Posey, P.: Analyzing the impact of CryoSat-2 ice thickness initialization on seasonal Arctic sea ice prediction, Ann. Glaciol., 61, 78–85, https://doi.org/10.1017/aog.2020.15, 2020. a
Allard, R. A., Farrell, S. L., Hebert, D. A., Johnston, W. F., Li, L., Kurtz,
N. T., Phelps, M. W., Posey, P. G., Tilling, R., Ridout, A., and Wallcraft, A. J.: Utilizing CryoSat-2 sea ice thickness to initialize a coupled ice-ocean modeling system, Adv. Space Res., 62, 1265–1280,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2017.12.030, 2018. a
Bannister, R. N.: A review of forecast error covariance statistics in
atmospheric variational data assimilation. I: Characteristics and
measurements of forecast error covariances, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 134, 1951–1970, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.339, 2008. a
Barbosa Aguiar, A., Waters, J., Price, M., Inverarity, G., Pequignet, C.,
Maksymczuk, J., Smout-Day, K., Martin, M., Bell, M., King, R., While, J., and
Siddorn, J.: The new Met Office global ocean forecast system at
Beaufort Gyre Exploration Project: About the Beaufort Gyre Exploration Project, available at: http://www.whoi.edu/beaufortgyre, last access: 16 December 2021. a
Bertino, L. and Lisaeter, K. A.: The TOPAZ monitoring and prediction system
for the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans, J. Operat. Oceanogr., 1, 15–18, https://doi.org/10.1080/1755876X.2008.11020098, 2008. a
Blockley, E. W. and Peterson, K. A.: Improving Met Office seasonal predictions of Arctic sea ice using assimilation of CryoSat-2 thickness, The Cryosphere, 12, 3419–3438, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-3419-2018, 2018. a, b, c, d
Blockley, E. W., Martin, M. J., McLaren, A. J., Ryan, A. G., Waters, J., Lea,
D. J., Mirouze, I., Peterson, K. A., Sellar, A., and Storkey, D.: Recent
development of the Met Office operational ocean forecasting system: An overview and assessment of the new Global FOAM forecasts, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2613–2638, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2613-2014, 2014. a, b, c, d
Bloom, S. C., Takacs, L. L., da Silva, A. M., and Ledvina, D.: Data assimilation using incremental analysis updates, Mon. Weather Rev., 124,
1256–1271, 1996. a
Carse, F., Martin, M. J., Sellar, A., and Blockley, E. W.: Impact of
assimilating temperature and salinity measurements by animal-borne sensors on
FOAM ocean model fields, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 141, 2934–2943,
https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2613, 2015. a
Collow, T. W., Wang, W., Kumar, A., and Zhang, J.: Improving Arctic sea ice
prediction using PIOMAS initial sea ice thickness in a coupled ocean-atmosphere model, Mon. Weather Rev., 143, 4618–4630,
https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-15-0097.1, 2015. a
Comiso, J. C., Parkinson, C. L., Gersten, R., and Stock, L.: Accelerated
decline in the Arctic sea ice cover, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L01703,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL031972, 2008. a
Day, J. J., Hawkins, E., and Tietsche, S.: Will Arctic sea ice thickness
initialization improve seasonal forecast skill?, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41,
7566–7575, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL061694, 2014. a
Dirkson, A., Merryfield, W. J., and Monahan, A.: Impacts of sea ice thickness
initialization on seasonal Arctic sea ice predictions, J. Climate, 30,
1001–1017, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0437.1, 2017. a
Farrell, S. L., Kurtz, N., Connor, L. N., Elder, B. C., Leuschen, C., Markus,
T., McAdoo, D. C., Panzer, B., Richter-Menge, J., and Sonntag, J. G.: A
first assessment of IceBridge snow and ice thickness data over Arctic sea
ice, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 50, 2098–2111, https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2011.2170843, 2012. a
Fiedler, E. K., Mao, C., Good, S. A., Waters, J., and Martin, M. J.: Improvements to feature resolution in the OSTIA sea surface temperature
analysis using the NEMOVAR assimilation scheme, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 145, 3609–3625, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3644, 2019. a
Giles, K. A., Laxon, S. W., Wingham, D. J., Wallis, D. W., Krabill, W. B.,
Leuschen, C. J., McAdoo, D., Manizade, S. S., and Raney, R. K.: Combined
airborne laser and radar altimeter measurements over the Fram Strait in May 2002, Remote Sens. Environ., 111, 182–194, 2007. a
Guiavarc'h, C., Roberts-Jones, J., Harris, C., Lea, D. J., Ryan, A., and
Ascione, I.: Assessment of ocean analysis and forecast from an atmosphere-ocean coupled data assimilation operational system, Ocean Sci.,
15, 1307–1326, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-15-1307-2019, 2019. a
Hollingsworth, A. and Lönnberg, P.: The statistical structure of
short-range forecast errors as determined from radiosonde data. Part i: The
wind field, Tellus A, 38, 111–136, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0870.1986.tb00460.x,
1986. a
Houtekamer, P. L., Lefaivre, L., Derome, J., Ritchie, H., and Mitchell, H. L.: A system simulation approach to ensemble prediction, Mon. Weather Rev.,
124, 1225–1242, 1996. a
Hunke, E. C., Lipscomb, W. H., Turner, A. K., Jeffery, N., and Elliott, S.:
CICE: The Los Alamos sea ice model documentation and software user’s
manual version 5.1, User Manual LA-CC-06-012, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, 2015. a
Ingleby, N. B. and Huddleston, M.: Quality control of ocean temperature and
salinity profiles – Historical and real-time data, J. Mar. Sci., 65, 158–175, 2005. a
Janjic, T., Bormann, N., Bocquet, M., Carton, J. A., Cohn, S. E., Dance, S. L., Losa, S. N., Nichols, N. K., Potthast, R., Waller, J. A., and Weston, P.: On the representation error in data assimilation, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 144, 1257–1278, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3130, 2017. a, b
Kaleschke, L., Maass, N., Haas, C., Hendricks, S., Heygster, G., and Tonboe,
R. T.: A sea-ice thickness retrieval model for 1.4 GHz radiometry and
application to airborne measurements over low salinity sea-ice, The Cryosphere, 4, 583–592, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-4-583-2010, 2010. a
Kern, S., Khvorostovsky, K., Skourup, H., Rinne, E., Parsakhoo, Z. S., Djepa,
V., Wadhams, P., and Sandven, S.: The impact of snow depth, snow density and
ice density on sea ice thickness retrieval from satellite radar altimetry:
Results from the ESA-CCI Sea Ice ECV Project Round Robin Exercise, The
Cryosphere, 9, 37–52, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-37-2015, 2015. a
Koenigk, T., Caian, M., Nikulin, G., and Schimanke, S.: Regional Arctic sea
ice variations as predictor for winter climate conditions, Clim. Dynam., 46,
317–337, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2586-1, 2016. a
Krishfield, R. and Proshutinsky, A.: BGOS ULS Data Processing Procedure,
Technical Report, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, available at:
http://www.whoi.edu/fileserver.do?id=85684&pt=2&p=100409 (last access: 29 March 2021), 2006. a
Krishfield, R. A., Proshutinsky, A., Tateyama, K., Williams, W. J., Carmack,
E. C., McLaughlin, F. A., and Timmermans, M.-L.: Deterioration of perennial
sea ice in the Beaufort Gyre from 2003 to 2012 and its impact on the oceanic
freshwater cycle, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 119, 1271–1305,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JC008999, 2014. a
Kurtz, N. T., Farrell, S. L., Studinger, M., Galin, N., Harbeck, J. P.,
Lindsay, R., Onana, V. D., Panzer, B., and Sonntag, J. G.: Sea ice thickness, freeboard, and snow depth products from Operation IceBridge airborne data, The Cryosphere, 7, 1035–1056, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-7-1035-2013, 2013. a
Kurtz, N. T., Galin, N., and Studinger, M.: An improved CryoSat-2 sea ice
freeboard retrieval algorithm through the use of waveform fitting, The
Cryosphere, 8, 1217–1237, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-1217-2014, 2014. a
Kwok, R. and Cunningham, G. F.: Variability of Arctic sea ice thickness and
volume from CryoSat-2, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 373, 20140157,
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0157, 2015. a
Kwok, R. and Rothrock, D.: Decline in Arctic sea ice thickness from submarine
and ICESat records: 1958–2008, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L15501,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039035, 2009. a
Kwok, R., Cunningham, G. F., Wensnahan, M., Rigor, I., Zwally, H. J., and Yi,
D.: Thinning and volume loss of the Arctic Ocean sea ice cover: 2003–2008,
J. Geophys. Res., 114, C07005, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JC005312, 2009. a
Landy, J. C., Petty, A. A., Tsamados, M., and Stroeve, J. C.: Sea ice roughness overlooked as a key source of uncertainty in CryoSat‐2 ice freeboard retrievals, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 125, e2019JC015820,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015820, 2020. a
Lavergne, T., Sorensen, A. M., Kern, S., Tonboe, R., Notz, D., Aaboe, S., Bell, L., Dybkjaer, G., Eastwood, S., Gabarro, C., Heygster, G., Killie, M. A., Kreiner, M. B., Lavelle, J., Saldo, R., Sandven, S., and Pedersen, L. T.:
Version 2 of the EUMETSAT OSI SAF and ESA CCI sea-ice concentration climate
data records, The Cryosphere, 13, 49–78, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-49-2019, 2019. a
Laxon, S., Peacock, N., and Smith, D.: High interannual variability of sea ice thickness in the Arctic region, Nature, 425, 947–950,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02050, 2003. a
Laxon, S. W., Giles, K. A., Ridout, A. L., Wingham, D. J., Willatt, R., Cullen, R., Kwok, R., Schweiger, A., Zhang, J., Haas, C., Hendricks, S., Krishfield, R., Kurtz, N., Farrell, S., and Davidson, M.: CryoSat‐2 estimates of Arctic sea ice thickness and volume, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 732–737,
https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50193, 2013. a, b
Lemieux, J.-F., Beaudoin, C., Dupont, F., Roy, F., Smith, G. C., Shlyaeva, A., Buehner, M., Caya, A., Chen, J., Carrieres, T., Pogson, L., DeRepentigny, P., Plante, A., Pestieau, P., Pellerin, P., Ritchie, H., Garric, G., and Ferry, N.: The Regional Ice Prediction System (RIPS): Verification of forecast sea ice concentration, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 142, 632–643, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2526, 2016. a
Liang, X., Zhao, F., Li, C., Zhang, L., and Li, B.: Evaluation of ArcIOPS sea
ice forecasting products during the ninth CHINARE-Arctic in summer 2018, Adv. Polar Sci., 31, 14–25, https://doi.org/10.13679/j.advps.2019.0019, 2020. a
Lindsay, R. and Schweiger, A.: Arctic sea ice thickness loss determined using
subsurface, aircraft, and satellite observations, The Cryosphere, 9,
269–283, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-269-2015, 2015. a
MacLachlan, C., Arribas, A., Peterson, K. A., Maidens, A., Fereday, D., Scaife, A. A., Gordon, M., Vellinga, M., Williams, A., Comer, R. E., Camp, J., Xavier, P., and Madec, G.: Global Seasonal Forecast System version 5 (GloSea5): A high resolution seasonal forecast system, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 141, 1072–1084, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2396, 2014. a, b
Madec, G.: NEMO Ocean Engine, Tech. Rep. 27, Pole de modelisation de l'Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace, available at:
http://hdl.handle.net/2122/13309 (last access: 4 June 2019), 2017. a
Mallett, R. D. C., Stroeve, J. C., Tsamados, M., Landy, J. C., Willatt, R.,
Nandan, V., and Liston, G. E.: Faster decline and higher variability in the
sea ice thickness of the marginal Arctic seas when accounting for dynamic snow cover, The Cryosphere, 15, 2429–2450, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-2429-2021,
2021. a
Massonnet, F., Fichefet, T., and Goosse, H.: Prospects for improved seasonal
Arctic sea ice predictions from multivariate data assimilation, Ocean Model., 88, 16–25, 2015. a
Meier, W. N., Hovelsrud, G. K., van Oort, B. E. H., Key, J. R., Kovacs, K. M., Michel, C., Haas, C., Granskog, M. A., Gerland, S., Perovich, D. K.,
Makshtas, A., and Reist, J. D.: Arctic sea ice in transformation: A review of recent observed changes and impacts on biology and human activity, Rev. Geophys., 52, 185–217, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000431, 2014. a
Meredith, M., Sommerkorn, M., Cassotta, S., Derksen, C., Ekaykin, A., Hollowed, A., Kofinas, G., Mackintosh, A., Melbourne-Thomas, J., Muelbert, M., Ottersen, G., Pritchard, H., and Schuur, E.: Polar Regions, in: IPCC
Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, edited by:
Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D., Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Tignor, M.,
Poloczanska, E., Mintenbeck, K., Alegría, A., Nicolai, M., Okem, A.,
Petzold, J., Rama, B., and Weyer, N., IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/ (last access: 16 December 2021), 2019. a, b
Mirouze, I., Blockley, E. W., Lea, D. J., Martin, M. J., and Bell, M. J.: A
multiple length scale correlation operator for ocean data assimilation,
Tellus A, 68, 29744, https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v68.29744, 2016. a
Mu, L., Yang, Q., Losch, M., Losa, S. N., Ricker, R., Nerger, L., and Liang,
X.: Improving sea ice thickness estimates by assimilating CryoSat-2 and SMOS
sea ice thickness data simultaneously, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 144, 529–538, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3225, 2018. a
Nandan, V., Geldsetzer, T., Yackel, J., Mahmud, M., Scharien, R., Howell, S.,
King, J., Ricker, R., and Else, B.: Effect of snow salinity on CryoSat‐2
Arctic first‐year sea ice freeboard measurements, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44,
10419–10426, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074506, 2017. a
Parrish, D. and Derber, J. C.: The National Meteorological Center's spectral
statistical interpolation analysis system , Mon. Weather Rev., 120, 1747–1763, 1992. a
Pfaffling, A., Haas, C., and Reid, J. E.: A direct helicopter EM sea ice
thickness inversion, assessed with synthetic and field data, Geophysics, 72,
F127–F137, 2007. a
Polavarapu, S., Ren, S., Rochon, Y., Sankey, D., Ek, N., Koshyk, J., and
Tarasick, D.: Data assimilation with the Canadian middle atmosphere model,
Atmos.-Ocean, 43, 77–100, https://doi.org/10.3137/ao.430105, 2005. a
Posey, P. G., Metzger, E. J., Wallcraft, A. J., Hebert, D. A., Allard, R. A.,
Smedstad, O. M., Phelps, M. W., Fetterer, F., Stewart, J. S., Meier, W. N.,
and Helfrich, S. R.: Improving Arctic sea ice edge forecasts by assimilating
high horizontal resolution sea ice concentration data into the US Navy's ice
forecast systems, The Cryosphere, 9, 1735–1745,
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-1735-2015, 2015. a
Ricker, R., Hendricks, S., Perovich, D. K., Helm, V., and Gerdes, R.: Impact
of snow accumulation on CryoSat-2 range retrievals over Arctic sea ice: An
observational approach with buoy data, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 4447–4455,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064081, 2015. a
Ricker, R., Hendricks, S., and Beckers, J. F.: The impact of geophysical
corrections on sea-ice freeboard retrieved from satellite altimetry, Remote
Sens., 8, 317, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8040317, 2016. a
Ricker, R., Hendricks, S., Kaleschke, L., Tian-Kunze, X., King, J., and Haas,
C.: A weekly Arctic sea-ice thickness data record from merged CryoSat-2 and
SMOS satellite data, The Cryosphere, 11, 1607–1623, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-1607-2017, 2017. a, b, c
Ridley, J. K., Blockley, E. W., Keen, A. B., Rae, J. G. L., West, A. E., and
Schroeder, D.: The sea ice model component of HadGEM3-GC3.1, Geosci. Model
Dev., 11, 713–723, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-713-2018, 2018. a
Rothrock, D. A., Zhang, J., and Yu, Y.: The Arctic ice thickness anomaly of
the 1990s: A consistent view from observations and models, J. Geophys. Res.,
108, 3083, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JC001208, 2003. a
Schweiger, A. J.: Unified Sea Ice Thickness Climate Data Record, Digital
Media [data set], http://psc.apl.uw.edu/sea_ice_cdr (last access: 5 August 2019), 2017. a
Screen, J. A.: Simulated atmospheric response to regional and pan-Arctic sea
ice loss, J. Climate, 30, 3945–3962, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0197.1, 2017. a
Smith, G. C., Roy, F., Reszka, M., Surcel Colan, D., He, Z., Deacu, D.,
Belanger, J.-M., Skachko, S., Liu, Y., Dupont, F., Lemieux, J.-F., Beaudoin,
C., Tranchant, B., Drevillon, M., Garric, G., Testut, C.-E., Lellouche, J.-M., Pellerin, P., Ritchie, H., Lu, Y., Davidson, F., Buehner, M., Caya, A., and Lajoieb, M.: Sea ice forecast verification in the Canadian Global Ice Ocean Prediction System, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 142, 659–671,
https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2555, 2015. a
Smith, L. C. and Stephenson, S. R.: New Trans-Arctic shipping routes navigable by midcentury, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 110, E1191–E1195,
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1214212110, 2013. a
Stonebridge, G., Scott, K. A., and Buehner, M.: Impacts on sea ice analyses
from the assumption of uncorrelated ice thickness observation errors:
Experiments using a 1D toy model, Tellus A, 70, 1445379, https://doi.org/10.1080/16000870.2018.1445379, 2018. a
Storkey, D., Blaker, A. T., Mathiot, P., Megann, A., Aksenov, Y., Blockley,
E. W., Calvert, D., Graham, T., Hewitt, H. T., Hyder, P., Kuhlbrodt, T., Rae,
J. G. L., and Sinha, B.: UK Global Ocean GO6 and GO7: A traceable hierarchy
of model resolutions, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3187–3213,
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3187-2018, 2018. a
Stroeve, J. and Notz, D.: Changing state of Arctic sea ice across all seasons, Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 103001, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aade56, 2018. a
Tian-Kunze, X., Kaleschke, L., Maass, N., Makynen, M., Serra, N., Drusch, M.,
and Krumpen, T.: SMOS-derived thin sea ice thickness: Algorithm baseline,
product specifications and initial verification, The Cryosphere, 8,
997–1018, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-997-2014, 2014. a
Tilling, R., Ridout, A., Shepherd, A., and Wingham, D.: Increased Arctic sea
ice volume after anomalously low melting in 2013, Nat. Geosci., 8, 643–648,
https://doi.org/10.1038/NGEO2489, 2015. a, b, c
Tonboe, R., Lavelle, J., Pfeiffer, R.-H., and Howe, E.: Product User Manual
for OSI SAF global sea ice concentration product OSI-401-b, Product User
Manual SAF/OSI/CDOP3/DMI_MET/TEC/MA/204, Danish Meteorological Institute, available at: https://osisaf-hl.met.no/sites/osisaf-hl.met.no/files/user_manuals/osisaf_cdop3_ss2_pum_ice-conc_v1p6.pdf
(last access: 4 June 2019), 2017.
a, b
Wei, T., Yan, Q., Qi, W., Ding, M., and Wang, C.: Projections of Arctic sea
ice conditions and shipping routes in the twenty-first century using CMIP6
forcing scenarios, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 104079, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abb2c8, 2020. a
Wingham, D. J., Francis, C. R., Baker, S., Bouzinac, C., Brockley, D., Cullen, R., de Chateau-Thierry, P., Laxon, S. W., Mallow, U., Phalippou, C. M. L., Ratier, G., Rey, L., Rostan, F., Viau, P., and Wallis, D. W.: CryoSat: A mission to determine the fluctuations in Earth's land and marine ice fields, Adv. Space Res., 37, 841–871, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2005.07.027, 2006. a
Xie, J., Counillon, F., and Bertino, L.: Impact of assimilating a merged
sea-ice thickness from CryoSat-2 and SMOS in the Arctic reanalysis, The
Cryosphere, 12, 3671–3691, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-3671-2018, 2018. a
Yang, Q., Losa, S. N., Losch, M., Tian-Kunze, X., Nerger, L., Liu, J.,
Kaleschke, L., and Zhang, Z.: Assimilating SMOS sea ice thickness into a
coupled ice-ocean model using a local SEIK filter, J. Geophys. Res., 119, 6680–6692, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JC009963, 2014. a
Yang, Q., Mu, L., Wu, X., Liu, J., Zheng, F., Zhang, J., and Li, C.: Improving Arctic sea ice seasonal outlook by ensemble prediction using an ice-ocean model, Atmos. Res., 227, 14–23, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2019.04.021, 2019. a
Zeng, Q., Lu, T., Lin, K.-C., Yuen, K. F., and Li, K. X.: The competitiveness of Arctic shipping over Suez Canal and China-Europe railway, Transport Policy, 86, 34–43, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.11.005, 2020. a
Short summary
Sea ice thickness (SIT) observations derived from CryoSat-2 satellite measurements have been successfully used to initialise an ocean and sea ice forecasting model (FOAM). Other centres have previously used gridded and averaged SIT observations for this purpose, but we demonstrate here for the first time that SIT measurements along the satellite orbit track can be used. Validation of the resulting modelled SIT demonstrates improvements in the model performance compared to a control.
Sea ice thickness (SIT) observations derived from CryoSat-2 satellite measurements have been...
