Hello everyone,
I have started my spin-down simulations right after my previous spin-up was finished (I have described the whole process in this thread).
Now I have started my transient simulations.
My dataset is from year 500 to 2000 (1deg, monthly, two members, globally).
And from year 500 to year 1850, my simulation structure has constant CO2, constant aerosol, constant land surface dataset, no timeseries of land use data, constant urban and fire data, (((and check_dynpft_consistency =.false. & do_transient_crops=.false. & do_transient_pfts=.false. & flanduse_timeseries=' '))). So the whole transient part is the seven atmospheric variables (precipitation, temperature, solar radiations, wind, pressue, humidity).
So, my question is that since there are almost no transient variables for driving the vegetation dynamics, can we start a FATES-CLM case from year 500 (according to the conditions I described above with almost everything constant except from the datm data)??? Or should I wait until my 500-1850 simulation finishes, and from 1850 onwards, I can start the FATES case?
I personally assume I should wait and start the FATES from 1850 when we have everything transient. But your opinion is also important since you all know better what exactly drives FATES and vegetation, and it is probably not only the variables I explained above (the constant ones), and vegetation dynamics in FATES could be dependent on other forcings as well (?). What do you think? I am asking this because it would be computationally expensive if I run 1350 years (from 500 to 1850) and then realize it wasn't even needed, so I need to make sure beforehand, so if FATES can be run with the conditions above, would it end up with meaningfull results for vegetation dynamics?
Thank you so much.
P.S. I was thinking of starting a FATES case with this compset (FATES in CLM5) because the previous spun-up cases I used Bgc (biogeochemistry) like I1850Clm50BgcCrop and IHISTClm50BgcCrop.
P.P.S. @slevis @afoster @macarew
I have started my spin-down simulations right after my previous spin-up was finished (I have described the whole process in this thread).
Now I have started my transient simulations.
My dataset is from year 500 to 2000 (1deg, monthly, two members, globally).
And from year 500 to year 1850, my simulation structure has constant CO2, constant aerosol, constant land surface dataset, no timeseries of land use data, constant urban and fire data, (((and check_dynpft_consistency =.false. & do_transient_crops=.false. & do_transient_pfts=.false. & flanduse_timeseries=' '))). So the whole transient part is the seven atmospheric variables (precipitation, temperature, solar radiations, wind, pressue, humidity).
So, my question is that since there are almost no transient variables for driving the vegetation dynamics, can we start a FATES-CLM case from year 500 (according to the conditions I described above with almost everything constant except from the datm data)??? Or should I wait until my 500-1850 simulation finishes, and from 1850 onwards, I can start the FATES case?
I personally assume I should wait and start the FATES from 1850 when we have everything transient. But your opinion is also important since you all know better what exactly drives FATES and vegetation, and it is probably not only the variables I explained above (the constant ones), and vegetation dynamics in FATES could be dependent on other forcings as well (?). What do you think? I am asking this because it would be computationally expensive if I run 1350 years (from 500 to 1850) and then realize it wasn't even needed, so I need to make sure beforehand, so if FATES can be run with the conditions above, would it end up with meaningfull results for vegetation dynamics?
Thank you so much.
P.S. I was thinking of starting a FATES case with this compset (FATES in CLM5) because the previous spun-up cases I used Bgc (biogeochemistry) like I1850Clm50BgcCrop and IHISTClm50BgcCrop.
P.P.S. @slevis @afoster @macarew