Modeling the impact of land use and climate change on neighborhood-scale evaporation and nighttime cooling: A surface energy balance approach

2011 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lily A. House-Peters ◽  
Heejun Chang
2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 4625-4639 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Barella-Ortiz ◽  
J. Polcher ◽  
A. Tuzet ◽  
K. Laval

Abstract. Potential evaporation (ETP) is a basic input for many hydrological and agronomic models, as well as a key variable in most actual evaporation estimations. It has been approached through several diffusive and energy balance methods, out of which the Penman–Monteith equation is recommended as the standard one. In order to deal with the diffusive approach, ETP must be estimated at a sub-diurnal frequency, as currently done in land surface models (LSMs). This study presents an improved method, developed in the ORCHIDEE LSM, which consists of estimating ETP through an unstressed surface-energy balance (USEB method). The results confirm the quality of the estimation which is currently implemented in the model (Milly, 1992). The ETP underlying the reference evaporation proposed by the Food and Agriculture Organization, FAO, (computed at a daily time step) has also been analysed and compared. First, a comparison for a reference period under current climate conditions shows that USEB and FAO's ETP estimations differ, especially in arid areas. However, they produce similar values when the FAO's assumption of neutral stability conditions is relaxed, by replacing FAO's aerodynamic resistance by that of the model's. Furthermore, if the vapour pressure deficit (VPD) estimated for the FAO's equation, is substituted by ORCHIDEE's VPD or its humidity gradient, the agreement between the daily mean estimates of ETP is further improved. In a second step, ETP's sensitivity to climate change is assessed by comparing trends in these formulations for the 21st century. It is found that the USEB method shows a higher sensitivity than the FAO's. Both VPD and the model's humidity gradient, as well as the aerodynamic resistance have been identified as key parameters in governing ETP trends. Finally, the sensitivity study is extended to two empirical approximations based on net radiation and mass transfer (Priestley–Taylor and Rohwer, respectively). The sensitivity of these ETP estimates is compared to the one provided by USEB to test if simplified equations are able to reproduce the impact of climate change on ETP.


2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 8197-8231 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Barella-Ortiz ◽  
J. Polcher ◽  
A. Tuzet ◽  
K. Laval

Abstract. Potential evaporation (ETP) is a basic input for hydrological and agronomic models, as well as a key variable in most actual evaporation estimations. It has been approached through several diffusive and energy balance methods, out of which the Penman–Monteith equation is recommended as the standard one. In order to deal with the diffusive approach, ETP must be estimated at a sub-diurnal frequency, as currently done in land surface models (LSM). This study presents an improved method, developed in the ORCHIDEE LSM, which consists in estimating ETP through an unstressed surface energy balance (USEB method). The results confirm the quality of the estimation which is currently implemented in the model (Milly, 1992). ETP has also been estimated using a reference equation (computed at a daily time step) provided by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). First, a comparison for a reference period under current climate conditions, shows that both formulations differ, specially in arid areas. However, they supply similar values when FAO's assumption of neutral stability conditions is relaxed, by replacing FAO's aerodynamic resistance by the model's one. Furthermore, if the vapour pressure deficit (VPD) estimated for FAO's equation, is substituted by ORCHIDEE's VPD or its humidity gradient, the daily mean estimate is further improved. In a second step, ETP's sensitivity to climate change is assessed comparing trends in both formulations for the 21st Century. It is found that the USEB method shows a higher sensitivity. Both VPD and the model's humidity gradient, as well as the aerodynamic resistance have been identified as key parameters in governing ETP trends. Finally, the sensitivity study is extended to three empirical approximations based on temperature, net radiation and mass transfer (Hargreaves, Priestley–Taylor and Rohwer, respectively). The sensitivity of these methods is compared to the USEB method's one to test if simplified equations are able to reproduce the impact of climate change.


2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (10) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Armstrong ◽  
Paul Valdes ◽  
Jo House ◽  
Joy Singarayer

Abstract Human-induced land-use change (LUC) alters the biogeophysical characteristics of the land surface influencing the surface energy balance. The level of atmospheric CO2 is expected to increase in the coming century and beyond, modifying temperature and precipitation patterns and altering the distribution and physiology of natural vegetation. It is important to constrain how CO2-induced climate and vegetation change may influence the regional extent to which LUC alters climate. This sensitivity study uses the HadCM3 coupled climate model under a range of equilibrium forcings to show that the impact of LUC declines under increasing atmospheric CO2, specifically in temperate and boreal regions. A surface energy balance analysis is used to diagnose how these changes occur. In Northern Hemisphere winter this pattern is attributed in part to the decline in winter snow cover and in the summer due to a reduction in latent cooling with higher levels of CO2. The CO2-induced change in natural vegetation distribution is also shown to play a significant role. Simulations run at elevated CO2, yet present-day vegetation show a significantly increased sensitivity to LUC, driven in part by an increase in latent cooling. This study shows that modeling the impact of LUC needs to accurately simulate CO2-driven changes in precipitation and snowfall and incorporate accurate, dynamic vegetation distribution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document