eclare@lanl_gov
Member
Yes, you can certainly read in shortwave and longwave radiation and use them directly instead of calculating them. Use the subroutines in ice_forcing.F90 for guidance and write a subroutine that does what you need.
-
The www2.cesm.ucar.edu website is currently down for maintenance
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
cloud fraction of offline CICE
- Thread starter hspark1@gmail_com
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cice consortium
I will also note that models are known to often have very different cloud fractions than those observed (e.g. https://agupubs-onlinelibrary-wiley-com.cuucar.idm.oclc.org/doi/full/10.1002/2015JD024699). Directly using the surface longwave and shortwave forcing, as suggested, will be more physically correct as ERA (or any other model you use) should take into account not only cloud fraction, but cloud height, phase, and thickness when calculating the radiative transfer code.
I will also note that models are known to often have very different cloud fractions than those observed (e.g. https://agupubs-onlinelibrary-wiley-com.cuucar.idm.oclc.org/doi/full/10.1002/2015JD024699). Directly using the surface longwave and shortwave forcing, as suggested, will be more physically correct as ERA (or any other model you use) should take into account not only cloud fraction, but cloud height, phase, and thickness when calculating the radiative transfer code.
I will also note that models are known to often have very different cloud fractions than those observed (e.g. https://agupubs-onlinelibrary-wiley-com.cuucar.idm.oclc.org/doi/full/10.1002/2015JD024699). Directly using the surface longwave and shortwave forcing, as suggested, will be more physically correct as ERA (or any other model you use) should take into account not only cloud fraction, but cloud height, phase, and thickness when calculating the radiative transfer code.
I will also note that models are known to often have very different cloud fractions than those observed (e.g. https://agupubs-onlinelibrary-wiley-com.cuucar.idm.oclc.org/doi/full/10.1002/2015JD024699). Directly using the surface longwave and shortwave forcing, as suggested, will be more physically correct as ERA (or any other model you use) should take into account not only cloud fraction, but cloud height, phase, and thickness when calculating the radiative transfer code.
I will also note that models are known to often have very different cloud fractions than those observed (e.g. https://agupubs-onlinelibrary-wiley-com.cuucar.idm.oclc.org/doi/full/10.1002/2015JD024699). Directly using the surface longwave and shortwave forcing, as suggested, will be more physically correct as ERA (or any other model you use) should take into account not only cloud fraction, but cloud height, phase, and thickness when calculating the radiative transfer code.