Explicit cloud representation in the <em>Atmos</em> 1D climate model for Earth and rocky planet applications

Thomas Fauchez; Giada Arney; Ravi Kumar Kopparapu; Shawn Domagal Goldman; Thomas Fauchez; Giada Arney; Ravi Kumar Kopparapu; Shawn Domagal Goldman

doi:10.3934/geosci.2018.4.180

AIMS Geosciences

2018, Volume 4, Issue 4: 180-191. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2018.4.180

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Explicit cloud representation in the Atmos 1D climate model for Earth and rocky planet applications

1.
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Road, Greenbelt, MD 20770, USA
2.
Goddard Earth Sciences Technology and Research (GESTAR), Universities Space Research Association, Columbia, MD 21046, USA
3.
Department of Astronomy, University of Maryland College Park, College Park, MD 20742, USA
4.
NASA Astrobiology Institute's Virtual Planetary Laboratory, P.O. Box 351580, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
5.
Sellers Exoplanet Environments Collaboration, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Received: 16 April 2018 Accepted: 15 November 2018 Published: 04 December 2018

1D climate models are less sophisticated than 3D global circulation models (GCMs), however their computational time is much less expensive, allowing a large number of runs in a short period of time to explore a wide parameter space. Exploring parameter space is particularly important for predicting the observable properties of exoplanets, for which few parameters are known with certainty. Therefore, 1D climate models are still very useful tools for planetary studies. In most of these 1D models, clouds are not physically represented in the atmosphere, despite having a well-known, significant impact on a planetary radiative budget. This impact is simulated by artificially raising surface albedo, in order to reproduce the observed-averaged surface temperature (i.e. 288 K for modern Earth) and a radiative balance at the top of the atmosphere. This non-physical representation of clouds, causes atmospheric longwave and shortwaves fluxes to not match observational data. Additionally, this technique represents a parameter that is highly-tuned to modern Earth’s climate, and may not be appropriate for planets that deviate from modern Earth’s climate conditions. In this paper, we present an update to the climate model within the Atmos 1D atmospheric modeling package with a physical representation of clouds. We show that this physical representation of clouds in the atmosphere allows both longwave and shortwave fluxes to match observational data. This improvement will allow us to study the energy fluxes for a variety of cloudy rocky planets, and increase our confidence in future simulations of temperature profile and net energy balance.
- earth,
- radiative budget,
- radiative forcing,
- cloud,
- climate,
- albedo
Citation: Thomas Fauchez, Giada Arney, Ravi Kumar Kopparapu, Shawn Domagal Goldman. Explicit cloud representation in the Atmos 1D climate model for Earth and rocky planet applications[J]. AIMS Geosciences, 2018, 4(4): 180-191. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2018.4.180

Related Papers:

Abstract

1D climate models are less sophisticated than 3D global circulation models (GCMs), however their computational time is much less expensive, allowing a large number of runs in a short period of time to explore a wide parameter space. Exploring parameter space is particularly important for predicting the observable properties of exoplanets, for which few parameters are known with certainty. Therefore, 1D climate models are still very useful tools for planetary studies. In most of these 1D models, clouds are not physically represented in the atmosphere, despite having a well-known, significant impact on a planetary radiative budget. This impact is simulated by artificially raising surface albedo, in order to reproduce the observed-averaged surface temperature (i.e. 288 K for modern Earth) and a radiative balance at the top of the atmosphere. This non-physical representation of clouds, causes atmospheric longwave and shortwaves fluxes to not match observational data. Additionally, this technique represents a parameter that is highly-tuned to modern Earth’s climate, and may not be appropriate for planets that deviate from modern Earth’s climate conditions. In this paper, we present an update to the climate model within the Atmos 1D atmospheric modeling package with a physical representation of clouds. We show that this physical representation of clouds in the atmosphere allows both longwave and shortwave fluxes to match observational data. This improvement will allow us to study the energy fluxes for a variety of cloudy rocky planets, and increase our confidence in future simulations of temperature profile and net energy balance.

References

[1]	Ramanathan V, Cess RD, Harrison EF, et al. (1989) Cloud-Radiative Forcing and Climate: Results from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment. Sci 243: 57–63. doi: 10.1126/science.243.4887.57
[2]	Arney G, Meadows V, Crisp D, et al. (2014) Spatially resolved measurements of H₂O, HCl, CO, OCS, SO₂, cloud opacity, and acid concentration in the Venus near-infrared spectral windows. J Geophys Res Planets 119: 1860–1891. doi: 10.1002/2014JE004662
[3]	Charnay B, Forget F, Tobie G, et al. (2014) Titan's past and future: 3D modeling of a pure nitrogen atmosphere and geological implications. Icarus 241: 269–279. doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2014.07.009
[4]	Kasting JF, Pollack JB, Crisp D (1984) Effects of high CO₂ levels on surface temperature and atmospheric oxidation state of the early Earth. J Atmos Chem 1: 403–428. doi: 10.1007/BF00053803
[5]	Kasting JF, Ackerman TP (1986) Climatic consequences of very high carbon dioxide levels in the earth's early atmosphere. Sci 234: 1383–1385. doi: 10.1126/science.11539665
[6]	Kasting JF (1987) Theoretical constraints on oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations in the Precambrian atmosphere. Precambrian Res 34: 205–229. doi: 10.1016/0301-9268(87)90001-5
[7]	Kasting JF (1988) Runaway and moist greenhouse atmospheres and the evolution of Earth and Venus. Icarus 74: 472–494. doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(88)90116-9
[8]	Kasting JF, Whitmire DP, Reynolds RT (1993) Habitable Zones around Main Sequence Stars. Icarus 101: 108–128. doi: 10.1006/icar.1993.1010
[9]	Kasting JF, Howard C, Kopparapu RK (2015) Stratospheric Temperatures and Water Loss from Moist Greenhouse Atmospheres of Earth-like Planets. The Astrophys J Lett 813: L3. doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/813/1/L3
[10]	Pavlov AA, Kasting JF, Brown LL, et al. (2000) Greenhouse warming by CH₄ in the atmosphere of early Earth. J Geophys Res 105: 11981–11990. doi: 10.1029/1999JE001134
[11]	Pavlov AA, Hurtgen MT, Kasting JF, et al. (2003) Methane-rich Proterozoic atmosphere? Geology 31: 87–90. doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(2003)031<0087:MRPA>2.0.CO;2
[12]	Kasting JF, Howard MT (2006) Atmospheric composition and climate on the early Earth. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 361: 1733–1742. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1902
[13]	Haqq-Misra JD, Domagal-Goldman SD, Kasting PJ, et al. (2008) A revised, hazy methane greenhouse for the archean earth. Astrobiology 8: 1127–1137. doi: 10.1089/ast.2007.0197
[14]	Kopparapu RK, Ramirez R, Kasting J, et al. (2013) Habitable Zones around Main-sequence Stars: New Estimates. The Astrophys J 765: 131. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/765/2/131
[15]	Arney G, Domagal-Goldman SD, Meadows VS, et al. (2016) The Pale Orange Dot: The Spectrum and Habitability of Hazy Archean Earth. Astrobiology 16: 873–899. doi: 10.1089/ast.2015.1422
[16]	Arney G, Meadows VS, Domagal-Goldman SD, et al. (2017) Pale Orange Dots: The Impact of Organic Haze on the Habitability and Detectability of Earthlike Exoplanets. The Astrophys J 836: 49. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/49
[17]	Way MJ, Aleinov I, Amundsen DS, et al. (2017) Resolving Orbital and Climate Keys of Earth and Extraterrestrial Environments with Dynamics (ROCKE-3D) 1.0: A General Circulation Model for Simulating the Climates of Rocky Planets. Astrophys J Suppl Ser 231: 12.
[18]	Wordsworth RD, Forget F, Selsis F,et al. (2011) Gliese 581d is the First Discovered Terrestrial-mass Exoplanet in the Habitable Zone. The Astrophys J Lett 733: L48. doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/733/2/L48
[19]	Neale RB, Richter JH, Conley AJ, et al. (2010) Description of the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model (CAM 4.0). NCAR.
[20]	Helling C, Lee G, Dobbs-Dixon I, et al. (2016) The mineral clouds on HD 209458b and HD 189733b. Mon Not of the R Astron Soc 460: 855–883. doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw662
[21]	Goldblatt C, Zahnle KJ (2011) Clouds and the Faint Young Sun Paradox. Clim Past 7: 203–220. doi: 10.5194/cp-7-203-2011
[22]	Boucher O, Randall D, Artaxo P, et al. (2013) Climate Change 2013: ThePhysical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth AssessmentReport of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[23]	Rossow WB, Schiffer RA (1999) Advances in Understanding Clouds from ISCCP. Bull of the Am Meteorol Soc 80: 2261–2288. doi: 10.1175/1520-0477(1999)080<2261:AIUCFI>2.0.CO;2
[24]	Rossow WB, Zhang Y, Wang J (2005) A Statistical Model of Cloud Vertical Structure Based on Reconciling Cloud Layer Amounts Inferred from Satellites and Radiosonde Humidity Profiles. J Climate 18: 3587–605. doi: 10.1175/JCLI3479.1
[25]	Laurent C, Brogniez G, Doutriaux-Boucher M, et al. (2000) Modeling of light scattering in cirrus clouds with inhomogeneous hexagonal monocrystals. Comparison with in-situ and ADEOS-POLDER measurements. Geophys Res Lett 27: 113–116.
[26]	Yang P, Gaob BC, Baumc BA, et al. (2001) Radiative properties of cirrus clouds in the infrared (8–13µm ) spectral region. J of Quant Spectrosc & Radiat Transf 70: 473–504.
[27]	Yang P, Wei H, Huang HL, et al. (2005) Scattering and absorption property database for nonspherical ice particles in the near- through far-infrared spectral region. App Opt 44: 5512–5523. doi: 10.1364/AO.44.005512
[28]	Yang P, Bi L, Baum BA, et al. (2013) Spectrally Consistent Scattering, Absorption, and Polarization Properties of Atmospheric Ice Crystals at Wavelengths from 0.2 to 100 μm. J of the Atmos Sci 70: 330–347. doi: 10.1175/JAS-D-12-039.1
[29]	Baum BA, Yang P, Heymsfield AJ, et al. (2005) Bulk Scattering Properties for the Remote Sensing of Ice Clouds. Part II: Narrowband Models. J of Appl Meteorol 44: 1896–1911.
[30]	Baum BA, Yang P, Heymsfield AJ, et al. (2011) Improvements in Shortwave Bulk Scattering and Absorption Models for the Remote Sensing of Ice Clouds. J of Appl Meteorol and Clim 50: 1037–1056. doi: 10.1175/2010JAMC2608.1
[31]	Baran AJ, Labonnote LC (2007) A self-consistent scattering model for cirrus. I: The solar region. Q J of the R Meteorol Soc 133: 1899–1912. doi: 10.1002/qj.164
[32]	Baran AJ, Connolly PJ, Lee C (2009) Testing an ensemble model of cirrus ice crystals using midlatitude in situ estimates of ice water content, volume extinction coefficient and the total solar optical depth. J of Quant Spectrosc and Radiat Trans 110: 1579–1598. doi: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2009.02.021
[33]	Baran AJ (2012) From the single-scattering properties of ice crystals to climate prediction: A way forward. Atmos Res 112: 45–69. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2012.04.010
[34]	Baran AJ, Cotton R, Furtado K, et al. (2014) A self-consistent scattering model for cirrus. II: The high and low frequencies. Q J of the R Meteorol Soc 140: 1039–1057.
[35]	Field PR, Heymsfield AJ, Bansemer A (2007) Snow Size Distribution Parameterization for Midlatitude and Tropical Ice Clouds. J of the Atmos Sci 64: 4346–4365. doi: 10.1175/2007JAS2344.1
[36]	Sourdeval O, Laurent C, Baran AJ, et al. (2016) A methodology for simultaneous retrieval of ice and liquid water cloud properties. Part 2: Near-global retrievals and evaluation against A-Train products. Q J of the R Meteorol Soc 142: 3063–3081.
[37]	Hogan RJ, Illingworth AJ (2000) Deriving cloud overlap statistics from radar. Q J of the R Meteorol Soc 126: 2903–2909. doi: 10.1002/qj.49712656914
[38]	Toon OB, McKay CP, Ackerman TP, et al. (1989) Rapid calculation of radiative heating rates and photodissociation rates in inhomogeneous multiple scattering atmospheres. J of Geophys Res: Atmos 94: 16287–16301. doi: 10.1029/JD094iD13p16287
[39]	Trenberth KE, Fasullo JT, Kiehl J (2009) Earth's Global Energy Budget. Bull of the Am Meteorol Soc 90: 311–324. doi: 10.1175/2008BAMS2634.1
[40]	Zhang Y, Rossow WB, Lacis AA, et al. (2004) Calculation of radiative fluxes from the surface to top of atmosphere based on ISCCP and other global data sets: Refinements of the radiative transfer model and the input data. J of Geophys Res: Atmos 109.

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2018 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)