Articles | Volume 18, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-17-2024
© 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/tc-18-17-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
02 Jan 2024
Research article |
| 02 Jan 2024
| 02 Jan 2024
Evaluation of reanalysis data and dynamical downscaling for surface energy balance modeling at mountain glaciers in western Canada
Department of Earth Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences (EOAS), The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
Valentina Radić
Department of Earth Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences (EOAS), The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
Rachel H. White
Department of Earth Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences (EOAS), The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
Mekdes Ayalew Tessema
Department of Earth Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences (EOAS), The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
Related authors
No articles found.
Rachel H. White and Lualawi Mareshet Admasu
Weather Clim. Dynam., 6, 549–570, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-549-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-6-549-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Mid-latitude atmospheric jet streams sometimes create "waveguides", which are thought to increase the chance of quasi-stationary waves – atmospheric circulation patterns that can lead to extreme weather events. We compare two methods of identifying atmospheric waveguides, finding that one method seems to be less impacted by the presence of waves and provides much stronger correlations with enhanced quasi-stationary waves, and recommend this method for future studies.
Cuiyi Fei and Rachel H. White
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1462, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1462, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Quasi-stationary Rossby waves, lasting weeks, can be linked to persistent extreme weather. The mechanisms of these quasi-stationary waves may be impacted by stationary forcings like topography, heating, and land surface. The presence of these forcings extends the duration of strong quasi-stationary wave events. Our climate model experiments give insights into the mechanisms of quasi-stationary waves, highlighting the importance of a combination of transient eddies and background flow conditions.
Jonathan P. Conway, Jakob Abermann, Liss M. Andreassen, Mohd Farooq Azam, Nicolas J. Cullen, Noel Fitzpatrick, Rianne H. Giesen, Kirsty Langley, Shelley MacDonell, Thomas Mölg, Valentina Radić, Carleen H. Reijmer, and Jean-Emmanuel Sicart
The Cryosphere, 16, 3331–3356, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-3331-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-3331-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We used data from automatic weather stations on 16 glaciers to show how clouds influence glacier melt in different climates around the world. We found surface melt was always more frequent when it was cloudy but was not universally faster or slower than under clear-sky conditions. Also, air temperature was related to clouds in opposite ways in different climates – warmer with clouds in cold climates and vice versa. These results will help us improve how we model past and future glacier melt.
Sam Anderson and Valentina Radić
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 795–825, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-795-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-795-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We develop and interpret a spatiotemporal deep learning model for regional streamflow prediction at more than 200 stream gauge stations in western Canada. We find the novel modelling style to work very well for daily streamflow prediction. Importantly, we interpret model learning to show that it has learned to focus on physically interpretable and physically relevant information, which is a highly desirable quality of machine-learning-based hydrological models.
Erica Madonna, David S. Battisti, Camille Li, and Rachel H. White
Weather Clim. Dynam., 2, 777–794, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-777-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-777-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The amount of precipitation over Europe varies substantially from year to year, with impacts on crop yields and energy production. In this study, we show that it is possible to infer much of the winter precipitation and temperature signal over Europe by knowing only the frequency of occurrence of certain atmospheric circulation patterns. The results highlight the importance of (daily) weather for understanding and interpreting seasonal signals.
Cited articles
Aas, K. S., Dunse, T., Collier, E., Schuler, T. V., Berntsen, T. K., Kohler, J., and Luks, B.: The climatic mass balance of Svalbard glaciers: a 10-year simulation with a coupled atmosphere–glacier mass balance model, The Cryosphere, 10, 1089–1104, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-1089-2016, 2016. a, b
Abrams, M., Crippen, R., and Fujisada, H.: ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) and ASTER Global Water Body Dataset (ASTWBD), Remote Sens., 12, 1156, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12071156, 2020. a
Alduchov, O. A. and Eskridge, R. E.: Improved Magnus` form approximation of saturation vapor pressure, Tech. rep., Department of Commerce, Asheville, NC (United States), https://doi.org/10.2172/548871, 1997. a
Anderson, J., Hardy, E., J., R., and Witmer, R.: A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data, Tech. Rep. 964, USGS Publications Warehouse, https://doi.org/10.3133/pp964, 1976. a
Anderson, S. and Radić, V.: Identification of local water resource vulnerability to rapid deglaciation in Alberta, Nat. Clim. Change, 10, 933–938, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0863-4, 2020. a, b
Andreassen, L. M., van den Broeke, M. R., Giesen, R. H., and Oerlemans, J.: A 5 year record of surface energy and mass balance from the ablation zone of Storbreen, Norway, J. Glaciol., 54, 245–258, https://doi.org/10.3189/002214308784886199, 2008. a
Annor, T., Lamptey, B., Wagner, S., Oguntunde, P., Arnault, J., Heinzeller, D., and Kunstmann, H.: High-resolution long-term WRF climate simulations over Volta Basin. Part 1: validation analysis for temperature and precipitation, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 133, 829–849, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-017-2223-5, 2018. a
Arendt, A., Walsh, J., and Harrison, W.: Changes of glaciers and climate in northwestern North America during the late twentieth century, J. Climate, 22, 4117 – 4134, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2784.1, 2009. a
Arndt, A., Scherer, D., and Schneider, C.: Atmosphere Driven Mass-Balance Sensitivity of Halji Glacier, Himalayas, Atmosphere, 12, 426, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12040426, 2021. a
Azam, M. F. and Srivastava, S.: Mass balance and runoff modelling of partially debris-covered Dokriani Glacier in monsoon-dominated Himalaya using ERA5 data since 1979, J. Hydrol., 590, 125432, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125432, 2020. a
Brock, B. W., Willis, I. C., and Sharp, M. J.: Measurement and parameterization of albedo variations at Haut Glacier d'Arolla, Switzerland, J. Glaciol., 46, 675–688, https://doi.org/10.3189/172756500781832675, 2000. a
Bryan, G. H., Wyngaard, J. C., and Fritsch, J. M.: Resolution requirements for the simulation of deep moist convection, Mon. Weather Rev., 131, 2394, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2003)131<2394:RRFTSO>2.0.CO;2, 2003. a
Clarke, G. K. C., Jarosch, A. H., Anslow, F. S., Radić, V., and Menounos, B.: Projected deglaciation of Western Canada in the twenty-first century, Nat. Geosci., 8, 372–377, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2407, 2015. a, b
Collier, E., Maussion, F., Nicholson, L. I., Mölg, T., Immerzeel, W. W., and Bush, A. B. G.: Impact of debris cover on glacier ablation and atmosphere–glacier feedbacks in the Karakoram, The Cryosphere, 9, 1617–1632, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-1617-2015, 2015. a, b, c, d
Collins, W., Rasch, P., Boville, B., Hack, J., Mccaa, J., Williamson, D., and Kiehl, J.: Description of the NCAR community atmosphere model (CAM 3.0), NCAR Technical Note, TN-464+STR, 2004. a
Craig, G. C. and Dörnbrack, A.: Entrainment in cumulus clouds: What resolution is cloud-resolving?, J. Atmos. Sci., 65, 3978, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JAS2613.1, 2008. a
Dee, D. P., Uppala, S. M., Simmons, A. J., Berrisford, P., Poli, P., Kobayashi, S., Andrae, U., Balmaseda, M. A., Balsamo, G., Bauer, P., Bechtold, P., Beljaars, A. C. M., van de Berg, L., Bidlot, J., Bormann, N., Delsol, C., Dragani, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A. J., Haimberger, L., Healy, S. B., Hersbach, H., Hólm, E. V., Isaksen, L., Kållberg, P., Köhler, M., Matricardi, M., McNally, A. P., Monge-Sanz, B. M., Morcrette, J.-J., Park, B.-K., Peubey, C., de Rosnay, P., Tavolato, C., Thépaut, J.-N., and Vitart, F.: The ERA-Interim reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data assimilation system, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 553–597, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.828, 2011. a
Denby, B. and Smeets, C. J. P. P.: Derivation of Turbulent Flux Profiles and Roughness Lengths from Katabatic Flow Dynamics, J. Appl. Meteorol., 39, 1601–1612, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(2000)039<1601:DOTFPA>2.0.CO;2, 2000. a
Devine, K. A. and Mekis, E.: Field accuracy of Canadian rain measurements, Atmosphere-Ocean, 46, 213–227, https://doi.org/10.3137/ao.460202, 2008. a
Duchon, C. E. and Biddle, C. J.: Undercatch of tipping-bucket gauges in high rain rate events, Adv. Geosci., 25, 11–15, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-25-11-2010, 2010. a
Dudhia, J.: Numerical study of convection observed during the Winter Monsoon Experiment using a mesoscale two-dimensional model, J. Atmos. Sci., 46, 3077–3107, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1989)046<3077:NSOCOD>2.0.CO;2, 1989. a, b
Earth Resources Observation And Science (EROS) Center: Global Multi-resolution Terrain Elevation Data 2010 (GMTED2010) [Data set], https://doi.org/10.5066/F7J38R2N (last access: 1 August 2020), 2017. a, b, c, d
Ebrahimi, S. and Marshall, S. J.: Surface energy balance sensitivity to meteorological variability on Haig Glacier, Canadian Rocky Mountains, The Cryosphere, 10, 2799–2819, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-2799-2016, 2016. a
Eidhammer, T., Booth, A., Decker, S., Li, L., Barlage, M., Gochis, D., Rasmussen, R., Melvold, K., Nesje, A., and Sobolowski, S.: Mass balance and hydrological modeling of the Hardangerjøkulen ice cap in south-central Norway, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4275–4297, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4275-2021, 2021. a, b, c
Erler, A., Peltier, W., and d'Orgeville, M.: Dynamically downscaled high resolution hydro-climate projections for Western Canada, J. Climate, 28, 423–450, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00174.1, 2014. a
Erler, A. R., Peltier, W. R., and D’Orgeville, M.: Dynamically downscaled high-resolution hydroclimate projections for Western Canada, J. Climate, 28, 423–450, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00174.1, 2015. a
Fitzpatrick, N.: An investigation of surface energy balance and turbulent heat flux on mountain glaciers (T), PhD thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0375764 (last access: 15 January 2023), 2018. a
Friedl, M. and Sulla-Menashe, D.: MCD12Q1 MODIS/Terra+Aqua Land Cover Type Yearly L3 Global 500m SIN Grid [Data set], NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC, 2004. a
Gbode, I. E., Dudhia, J., Ogunjobi, K. O., and Ajayi, V. O.: Sensitivity of different physics schemes in the WRF model during a West African monsoon regime, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 136, 733–751, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-018-2538-x, 2019. a
Gerard, L.: An integrated package for subgrid convection, clouds and precipitation compatible with meso-gamma scales, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 133, 711–730, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.58, 2007. a
Gerber, F., Besic, N., Sharma, V., Mott, R., Daniels, M., Gabella, M., Berne, A., Germann, U., and Lehning, M.: Spatial variability in snow precipitation and accumulation in COSMO–WRF simulations and radar estimations over complex terrain, The Cryosphere, 12, 3137–3160, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-3137-2018, 2018. a
Giese, A., Rupper, S., Keeler, D., Johnson, E., and Forster, R.: Indus river basin glacier melt at the subbasin scale, Front. Earth Sci., 10, https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2022.767411, 2022. a
Gillett, S. and Cullen, N. J.: Atmospheric controls on summer ablation over Brewster Glacier, New Zealand, Int. J. Climatol., 31, 2033–2048, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2216, 2011. a
Gochis, D., Barlage, M., Cabell, R., Casali, M., Dugger, A., FitzGerald, K., McAllister, M., McCreight, J., RafieeiNasab, A., Read, L., Sampson, K., Yates, D., and Zhang, Y.: The WRF-Hydro modeling system technical description, (Version 5.2.0), Tech. rep., NCAR, https://ral.ucar.edu/sites/default/files/public/projects/wrf-hydro/technical-description-user-guide/wrf-hydrov5.2technicaldescription.pdf (last access: 15 January 2023), 2020. a
Goger, B., Stiperski, I., Nicholson, L., and Sauter, T.: Large-eddy simulations of the atmospheric boundary layer over an Alpine glacier: Impact of synoptic flow direction and governing processes, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 148, 1319–1343, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.4263, 2022. a, b
Grell, G. A.: Prognostic Evaluation of Assumptions Used by Cumulus Parameterizations, Mon. Weather Rev., 121, 764–787, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1993)121<0764:PEOAUB>2.0.CO;2, 1993. a, b
Grell, G. A. and Dévényi, D.: A generalized approach to parameterizing convection combining ensemble and data assimilation techniques, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, 38-1–38-4, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL015311, 2002. a, b
Gualtieri, G.: Reliability of ERA5 Reanalysis Data for Wind Resource Assessment: A Comparison against Tall Towers, Energies, 14, 4169, https://doi.org/10.3390/en14144169, 2021. a
He, C., Valayamkunnath, P., Barlage, M., Chen, F., Gochis, D., Cabell, R., Schneider, T., Rasmussen, R., Niu, G.-Y., Yang, Z.-L., Niyogi, D., and Ek, M.: The Community Noah-MP Land Surface Modeling System Technical Description Version 5.0, Tech. rep., NCAR/UCAR, https://doi.org/10.5065/EW8G-YR95, 2023. a
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 hourly data on single levels from 1959 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.adbb2d47 (last access: 27 June 2021), 2018. a, b
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P., Biavati, G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., De Chiara, G., Dahlgren, P., Dee, D., Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A., Haimberger, L., Healy, S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm, E., Janisková, M., Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., de Rosnay, P., Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume, S., and Thépaut, J.-N.: The ERA5 global reanalysis, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 146, 1999–2049, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803, 2020. a, b, c
Hirose, J. M. and Marshall, S. J.: Glacier meltwater contributions and glaciometeorological regime of the Illecillewaet River Basin, British Columbia, Canada, Atmosphere-Ocean, 51, 416–435, https://doi.org/10.1080/07055900.2013.791614, 2013. a
Hock, R. and Holmgren, B.: A distributed surface energy-balance model for complex topography and its application to Storglaciären, Sweden, J. Glaciol., 51, 25–36, https://doi.org/10.3189/172756505781829566, 2005. a
Hong, S.-Y., Noh, Y., and Dudhia, J.: A new vertical diffusion package with an explicit treatment of entrainment processes, Mon. Weather Rev., 134, 2318–2341, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR3199.1, 2006. a
Hugonnet, R., McNabb, R., Berthier, E., Menounos, B., Nuth, C., Girod, L., Farinotti, D., Huss, M., Dussaillant, I., Brun, F., and Kääb, A.: Accelerated global glacier mass loss in the early twenty-first century, Nature, 592, 726–731, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03436-z, 2021. a
Hwang, C.-L. and Yoon, K.: Methods for Multiple Attribute Decision Making, in: Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications A State-of-the-Art Survey, 58–191, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3, 1981. a
Iacono, M. J., Delamere, J. S., Mlawer, E. J., Shephard, M. W., Clough, S. A., and Collins, W. D.: Radiative forcing by long-lived greenhouse gases: Calculations with the AER radiative transfer models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D13, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD009944, 2008. a, b
Janjić, Z. I.: The step-mountain eta coordinate model: Further developments of the convection, viscous sublayer, and turbulence closure schemes, Mon. Weather Rev., 122, 927–945, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1994)122<0927:TSMECM>2.0.CO;2, 1994. a, b, c, d
Janjić, Z. I.: The surface layer in the NCEP eta model, in: Eleventh Conference on Numerical Weather Prediction, Norfolk, VA, 19–23 August, Amererican Meteor Society, Boston, MA, 345–355, 1996. a
Janjić, Z. I.: Nonsingular implementation of the Mellor–Yamada Level 2.5 scheme in the NCEP meso model, NCEP Office Note, 436, 2002. a
Jiménez, P. A., Dudhia, J., González-Rouco, J. F., Navarro, J., Montávez, J. P., and García-Bustamante, E.: A Revised Scheme for the WRF Surface Layer Formulation, Mon. Weather Rev., 140, 898–918, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00056.1, 2012. a
Jung, Y. and Lin, Y.-L.: Assessment of a regional-scale weather model for hydrological applications in South Korea, Environ. Nat. Resour. Res., 6, 28, https://doi.org/10.5539/enrr.v6n2p28, 2016. a
Kain, J. S.: The Kain-Fritsch convective parameterization: An update, J. Appl. Meteorol., 43, 170–181, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(2004)043<0170:TKCPAU>2.0.CO;2, 2004. a
Kinnard, C., Larouche, O., Demuth, M. N., and Menounos, B.: Modelling glacier mass balance and climate sensitivity in the context of sparse observations: application to Saskatchewan Glacier, western Canada, The Cryosphere, 16, 3071–3099, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-3071-2022, 2022. a
Kronenberg, M., van Pelt, W., Machguth, H., Fiddes, J., Hoelzle, M., and Pertziger, F.: Long-term firn and mass balance modelling for Abramov Glacier in the data-scarce Pamir Alay, The Cryosphere, 16, 5001–5022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-5001-2022, 2022. a
Larsen, C. F., Motyka, R. J., Arendt, A. A., Echelmeyer, K. A., and Geissler, P. E.: Glacier changes in southeast Alaska and northwest British Columbia and contribution to sea level rise, J. Geophys. Res.-Earth Surf., 112, F1, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JF000586, 2007. a
Li, Y., Li, Z., Zhang, Z., Chen, L., Kurkute, S., Scaff, L., and Pan, X.: High-resolution regional climate modeling and projection over western Canada using a weather research forecasting model with a pseudo-global warming approach, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4635–4659, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4635-2019, 2019. a
Liu, C., Ikeda, K., Thompson, G., Rasmussen, R., and Dudhia, J.: High-resolution simulations of wintertime precipitation in the Colorado Headwaters region: Sensitivity to physics parameterizations, Mon. Weather Rev., 139, 3533–3553, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00009.1, 2011. a
Lundquist, J., Hughes, M., Gutmann, E., and Kapnick, S.: Our Skill in Modeling Mountain Rain and Snow is Bypassing the Skill of Our Observational Networks, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 100, 2473–2490, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-19-0001.1, 2019. a
MacDougall, A. H., Wheler, B. A., and Flowers, G. E.: A preliminary assessment of glacier melt-model parameter sensitivity and transferability in a dry subarctic environment, The Cryosphere, 5, 1011–1028, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-5-1011-2011, 2011. a
Marshall, S. J. and Miller, K.: Seasonal and interannual variability of melt-season albedo at Haig Glacier, Canadian Rocky Mountains, The Cryosphere, 14, 3249–3267, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-3249-2020, 2020. a, b, c
Martens, B., Schumacher, D. L., Wouters, H., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Verhoest, N. E. C., and Miralles, D. G.: Evaluating the land-surface energy partitioning in ERA5, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4159–4181, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4159-2020, 2020. a
Marzeion, B., Hock, R., Anderson, B., Bliss, A., Champollion, N., Fujita, K., Huss, M., Immerzeel, W. W., Kraaijenbrink, P., Malles, J.-H., Maussion, F., Radić, V., Rounce, D. R., Sakai, A., Shannon, S., van de Wal, R., and Zekollari, H.: Partitioning the Uncertainty of Ensemble Projections of Global Glacier Mass Change, Earth's Future, 8, e01470, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EF001470, 2020. a
Matsui, T., Zhang, S. Q., Lang, S. E., Tao, W.-K., Ichoku, C., and Peters-Lidard, C. D.: Impact of radiation frequency, precipitation radiative forcing, and radiation column aggregation on convection-permitting West African monsoon simulations, Clim. Dynam., 55, 193–213, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4187-2, 2018. a
Max, M.-D. C. and Suarez, M. J.: An Efficient Thermal Infrared Radiation Parameterization For Use In General Circulation Models, NASA Technical Memorandum, 3, 85, https://archive.org/details/nasa_techdoc_19950009331 (last access: 1 December 2022), 1994. a
Mesinger, F.: Forecasting upper tropospheric turbulence within the framework of the Mellor-Yamada 2.5 closure, in: Res. Activ. in Atmos. and Ocean. Mod., WMO, Geneva, CAS/JSC WGNE, vol. 18, 4.28–4.29, 1993. a
Mills, C. M.: Modification of the Weather Research and Forecasting Model's treatment of sea ice albedo over the Arctic Ocean, WRF 3.3.1 Code Submission Doc., https://publish.illinois.edu/catrinmills/files/2012/10/Mills_WRFIceAlbedoProj_Summary.pdf (last access: 10 December 2021), 2011. a
Milovac, J., Warrach-Sagi, K., Behrendt, A., Späth, F., Ingwersen, J., and Wulfmeyer, V.: Investigation of PBL schemes combining the WRF model simulations with scanning water vapor differential absorption lidar measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 624–649, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023927, 2016. a
Mlawer, E. J., Taubman, S. J., Brown, P. D., Iacono, M. J., and Clough, S. A.: Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated correlated-k model for the longwave, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102, 16663–16682, https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD00237, 1997. a
Mölg, T., Großhauser, M., Hemp, A., Hofer, M., and Marzeion, B.: Limited forcing of glacier loss through land-cover change on Kilimanjaro, Nat. Clim. Change, 2, 254–258, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1390, 2012. a
Morrison, H., Thompson, G., and Tatarskii, V.: Impact of Cloud Microphysics on the Development of Trailing Stratiform Precipitation in a Simulated Squall Line: Comparison of One- and Two-Moment Schemes, Mon. Weather Rev., 137, 991–1007, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2556.1, 2009. a
Muñoz-Sabater, J., Dutra, E., Agustí-Panareda, A., Albergel, C., Arduini, G., Balsamo, G., Boussetta, S., Choulga, M., Harrigan, S., Hersbach, H., Martens, B., Miralles, D. G., Piles, M., Rodríguez-Fernández, N. J., Zsoter, E., Buontempo, C., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5-Land: a state-of-the-art global reanalysis dataset for land applications, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4349–4383, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4349-2021, 2021. a, b, c
Mukherjee, K., Menounos, B., Shea, J., Mortezapour, M., Ednie, M., and Demuth, M. N.: Evaluation of surface mass-balance records using geodetic data and physically-based modelling, Place and Peyto glaciers, western Canada, J. Glaciol., 276, 1–18, https://doi.org/10.1017/jog.2022.83, 2022. a, b
Nakanishi, M. and Niino, H.: An improved Mellor–Yamada Level-3 model: Its numerical stability and application to a regional prediction of advection fog, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 119, 397–407, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-005-9030-8, 2006. a, b
Nakanishi, M. and Niino, H.: Development of an improved turbulence closure model for the atmospheric boundary layer, J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan. Ser. II, 87, 895–912, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.87.895, 2009. a, b
NASA/METI/AIST/Japan Spacesystems and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team: ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model V003 [Data set], NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC, https://doi.org/10.5067/ASTER/ASTGTM.003 (last access: 1 August 2020), 2019. a
Nash, J. and Sutcliffe, J.: River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I – A discussion of principles, J. Hydrol., 10, 282–290, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6, 1970. a
Niu, G.-Y., Yang, Z.-L., Mitchell, K. E., Chen, F., Ek, M. B., Barlage, M., Kumar, A., Manning, K., Niyogi, D., Rosero, E., Tewari, M., and Xia, Y.: The community Noah land surface model with multiparameterization options (Noah-MP): 1. Model description and evaluation with local-scale measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D12, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015139, 2011. a, b
Noël, B., van de Berg, W. J., Lhermitte, S., Wouters, B., Machguth, H., Howat, I., Citterio, M., Moholdt, G., Lenaerts, J. T. M., and van den Broeke, M. R.: A tipping point in refreezing accelerates mass loss of Greenland's glaciers and ice caps, Nat. Commun., 8, 14730, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14730, 2017. a
Nossent, J. and Bauwens, W.: Application of a normalized Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency to improve the accuracy of the Sobol' sensitivity analysis of a hydrological model, in: EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, p. 237, 2012. a
Oerlemans, J. and Knap, W. H.: A 1 year record of global radiation and albedo in the ablation zone of Morteratschgletscher, Switzerland, J. Glaciol., 44, 231–238, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022143000002574, 1998. a
Olson, J. B., Kenyon, J. S., Angevine, W. A., Brown, J. M., and Pagowski, Mariusz abd Sušelj, K.: A description of the MYNN-EDMF Scheme and the coupling to other components in WRF–ARW, OAA Technical Memorandum OAR GSD, 61, 37, https://doi.org/10.25923/n9wm-be49, 2019. a, b
Pervin, L. and Gan, T. Y.: Sensitivity of physical parameterization schemes in WRF model for dynamic downscaling of climatic variables over the MRB, J. Water Climate Change, 12, 1043–1058, https://doi.org/10.2166/wcc.2020.036, 2020. a
Petch, J. C.: Sensitivity studies of developing convection in a cloud-resolving model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 132, 345–358, https://doi.org/10.1256/qj.05.71, 2006. a
Radić, V., Bliss, A., Beedlow, A. C., Hock, R., Miles, E., and Cogley, J. G.: Regional and global projections of twenty-first century glacier mass changes in response to climate scenarios from global climate models, Clim. Dynam., 42, 37–58, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1719-7, 2014. a
Radić, V., Menounos, B., Shea, J., Fitzpatrick, N., Tessema, M. A., and Déry, S. J.: Evaluation of different methods to model near-surface turbulent fluxes for a mountain glacier in the Cariboo Mountains, BC, Canada, The Cryosphere, 11, 2897–2918, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-2897-2017, 2017. a, b, c, d, e
RGI Consortium: Randolph glacier inventory – A dataset of global glacier outlines, version 6, NSIDC: National Snow and Ice Data Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.7265/4m1f-gd79 (last access: 1 May 2022), 2017. a, b
Rounce, D. R., Hock, R., Maussion, F., Hugonnet, R., Kochtitzky, W., Huss, M., Berthier, E., Brinkerhoff, D., Compagno, L., Copland, L., Farinotti, D., Menounos, B., and McNabb, R. W.: Global glacier change in the 21st century: Every increase in temperature matters, Science, 379, 78–83, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abo1324, 2023. a, b
Schindler, D. W. and Donahue, W. F.: An impending water crisis in Canada's western prairie provinces, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 103, 7210–7216, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0601568103, 2006. a
Shannon, S., Smith, R., Wiltshire, A., Payne, T., Huss, M., Betts, R., Caesar, J., Koutroulis, A., Jones, D., and Harrison, S.: Global glacier volume projections under high-end climate change scenarios, The Cryosphere, 13, 325–350, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-325-2019, 2019. a
Shirai, T., Enomoto, Y., Watanabe, M., and Arikawa, T.: Sensitivity analysis of the physics options in the Weather Research and Forecasting model for typhoon forecasting in Japan and its impacts on storm surge simulations, Coast. Eng. J., 64, 506–532, https://doi.org/10.1080/21664250.2022.2124040, 2022. a
Sicart, J. E., Wagnon, P., and Ribstein, P.: Atmospheric controls of the heat balance of Zongo Glacier (16∘ S, Bolivia), J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 110, D12106, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005732, 2005. a, b
Skamarock, W. C. and Klemp, J. B.: A time-split nonhydrostatic atmospheric model for weather research and forecasting applications, J. Comput. Phys., 227, 3465–3485, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2007.01.037, 2008. a, b, c, d
Skamarock, W. C., Klemp, J. B., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., Liu, Z., Berner, J., Wang, W., Powers, J. G., Duda, M. G., Barker, D. M., and Huang, X.-Y.: A description of the Advanced Research WRF Version 4.1, Tech. rep., UCAR/NCAR, https://doi.org/10.5065/1dfh-6p97, 2019. a, b, c, d
Srivastava, S. and Azam, M. F.: Mass- and Energy-Balance Modeling and Sublimation Losses on Dokriani Bamak and Chhota Shigri Glaciers in Himalaya Since 1979, Front. Water, 4, https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2022.874240, 2022. a
Stergiou, I., Tagaris, E., and Sotiropoulou, R.-E. P.: Sensitivity assessment of WRF parameterizations over Europe, Proceedings, 1, 119, https://doi.org/10.3390/ecas2017-04138, 2017. a
Stull, R. B.: Practical meteorology: An algebra-based survey of atmospheric science, Department of Earth, Ocean & Atmospheric Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, https://doi.org/10.14288/1.0300441, 2015. a
Suzuki, K. and Zupanski, M.: Uncertainty in solid precipitation and snow depth prediction for Siberia using the Noah and Noah-MP land surface models, Front. Earth Sci., 12, 672–682, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-018-0691-2, 2018. a
Tarek, M., Brissette, F. P., and Arsenault, R.: Evaluation of the ERA5 reanalysis as a potential reference dataset for hydrological modelling over North America, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 2527–2544, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-2527-2020, 2020. a
Tewari, M., Chen, F., Wang, W., Dudhia, J., Lemone, A., Mitchell, E., Ek, M., Gayno, G., Wegiel, W., and Cuenca, R. H.: Implementation and verification of the united N land surface model in the WRF model, in: 20th Conference on Weather Analysis and Forecasting/16th Conference on Numerical Weather Prediction, 11–15, 2004. a, b
Thompson, G. and Eidhammer, T.: A study of aerosol impacts on clouds and precipitation development in a large winter cyclone, J. Atmos. Sci., 71, 3636–3658, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-13-0305.1, 2014. a
Thompson, G., Field, P., Rasmussen, R., and Hall, W.: Explicit forecasts of winter precipitation using an improved bulk microphysics scheme. Part II: Implementation of a new snow parameterization, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 5095–5115, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2387.1, 2008. a, b
Tzeng, G. and Huang, J.: Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, A Chapman & Hall book, Taylor & Francis, ISBN 9781439861578, 2011. a
Wagner, J. S., Gohm, A., and Rotach, M. W.: The impact of horizontal model grid resolution on the boundary layer structure over an idealized valley, Mon. Weather Rev., 142, 3446–3465, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-14-00002.1, 2014. a
Wang, X., Tolksdorf, V., Otto, M., and Scherer, D.: WRF-based dynamical downscaling of ERA5 reanalysis data for High Mountain Asia: Towards a new version of the High Asia Refined analysis, Int. J. Climatol., 41, 743–762, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.6686, 2021. a, b
WRF Community: Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model, WRF Community [code], https://doi.org/10.5065/D6MK6B4K, 2000. a
Yang, Z.-L., Niu, G.-Y., Mitchell, K. E., Chen, F., Ek, M. B., Barlage, M., Longuevergne, L., Manning, K., Niyogi, D., Tewari, M., and Xia, Y.: The community Noah land surface model with multiparameterization options (Noah-MP): 2. Evaluation over global river basins, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015140, 2011. a, b
Zemp, M., Frey, H., Gärtner-Roer, I., Nussbaumer, S. U., Hoelzle, M., Paul, F., Haeberli, W., Denzinger, F., Ahlstrøm, A. P., Anderson, B., and et al.: Historically unprecedented global glacier decline in the early 21st century, J. Glaciol., 61, 745–762, https://doi.org/10.3189/2015JoG15J017, 2015. a
Zeyaeyan, S., Fattahi, E., Ranjbar, A., Azadi, M., and Vazifedoust, M.: Evaluating the effect of physics schemes in WRF simulations of summer rainfall in North West Iran, Climate, 5, 48, https://doi.org/10.3390/cli5030048, 2017. a
Zhang, Y., Hemperly, J., Meskhidze, N., and Skamarock, W. C.: The Global Weather Research and Forecasting (GWRF) model: Model evaluation, sensitivity study, and future year simulation, Atmos. Climate Sci., 02, 231–253, https://doi.org/10.4236/acs.2012.23024, 2012. a
Short summary
Our study increases our confidence in using reanalysis data for reconstructions of past glacier melt and in using dynamical downscaling for long-term simulations from global climate models to project glacier melt. We find that the surface energy balance model, forced with reanalysis and dynamically downscaled reanalysis data, yields <10 % difference in the modeled total melt energy when compared to the same model being forced with observations at our glacier sites in western Canada.
Our study increases our confidence in using reanalysis data for reconstructions of past glacier...
