Scope and status of cloud property Scope and status of cloud property
productsproducts Claudia Stubenrauch*,
S. Kinne, W. B. Rossow
+ Cloud Assessment Team
*Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique, IPSL/CNRS Ecole Polytechnique, France
Max Planck
Cloud AssessmentCloud Assessment
http://climserv.ipsl.polytechnique.fr/gewexca
Cloud Assessment
initiated in 2005 by GEWEX Radiation panel (GRP)
2005-2010: 4 workshops (Madison, New York, Berlin)
2009-2011: Preparation of common data base (monthly statistics in netCDF format)
2011: WCRP report, BAMS article & opening of data base to public
http://climserv.ipsl.polytechnique.fr/gewexca
co-chairs: C. Stubenrauch, S. Kinne
Assessments essential for climate studies & model evaluation:
Homogenized documentation on•sensor, calibration •retrieval method, ancillary data•sampling•evaluation
state strength & limitations & suitable applications for each data setmake clear statements for each of the cloud properties(global averages & distributions, regional variability, seasonal cycles, diurnal cycle, interannual variations, longterm anomalies)
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
3
properties: (GCOS ECV’s)
• cloud amount CA + rel. cloud type amount
• pressure/ height CP/CZ
• temperature CT
• IR emissivity CEM
• eff cloud amount CAE (= cloud amount weighted by emissivity)
• VIS optical depth COD
• Water path CLWP/CIWP
• eff part. radius CRE
1° x 1° monthly statistics per obs time: ● averages, ●monthly variability, ● histogramshistograms(tot, High, Mid Low Water, Ice) CP< 440 hPa, CP>680hPa CT>260K, CT<260 / 230K
Cloud Assessment common data base
to facilitate assessments, climate studies & model evaluation
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
4
ISCCPISCCP GEWEX cloud dataset 1984-2007 (Rossow et al. 1983, 1999)
TOVS Path-BTOVS Path-B 1987-1994 (Stubenrauch et al. 1999, 2006) AIRS-LMDAIRS-LMD 2003-2009 (Stubenrauch et al. 2008, 2010)
MODIS-SMODIS-ScienceTTeameam 2001/3-2009 (Ackerman et al.; Platnick et al.) MODIS-CERESMODIS-CERES 2001/3-2006 (Minnis et al.)
MISRMISR 2001-2007 (DiGirolamo et al.)
relatively new retrieval versions:
PATMOS-xPATMOS-x (AVHRR) 1982-2009 (histos 96-09) (Heidinger et al.) ATSR-GRAPEATSR-GRAPE ERS, 1999-2002 / ENV, 2003-2009 (Poulsen et al.)
only CA or CAE & CT:
HIRS-NOAAHIRS-NOAA 1982-2008 (Wylie et al. 2005) CALIPSO-SCALIPSO-ScienceTTeameam 2007-2008 (Winker et al. 2007, 2009)
CALIPSO-GOCCP CALIPSO-GOCCP 2007-2008 (Chepfer et al. 2009)
POLDERPOLDER (O2 & Rayleigh) 2006-2008 (Riedi et al.)
Participating datasets:
complementary cloud information:
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
5
Cloud properties from space:1) multi-spectral cloud detection 2) cloud property retrieval
(based on radiative transfer)
Passive remote sensing (>1980) Active (A-Train, >2006)info on uppermost cloud layeruppermost cloud layer info on all cloud all cloud layerslayersgood spatial coverage sparse sampling (track/1000km)
•p/z, T (radiative height)(radiative height) VIS / IR
•horizontal extension•bulk microphysical properties
•z (top)(top) VIS
•vertical extension •microphys. prop. profiles
IR-NIR-VIS radiometers, IR Sounders, multi-angle VIS radiometers perceive clouds differently
cloud property accuracy scene dependent ! most difficult scenes: low contrast with surface (thin Ci, low cld, polar regions ), multi-layer Ci
Global : generalized vs optimized retrievals
lidar, radar perceive clouds differently
lidar : sensitive to thin (subvis) ci, apparent cloud base (COD<5)-> lidar – radar synergy
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
6
IR-NIR-VIS radiometers good spat res (1-5km), 1 to 5 radiometric channels: day-night1) COD,CT (assumption on microphys) 2) spectral diff (VIS-NIR) -> CRE, CWP IR Sounders spat res 15km, good spectral res in CO2 abs band (5-8 channels): sensitive to thin cirrus1) CP,CEM (nono assumption on microphys) 2) spectral diff (8-12m) -> CRE, CWP (only ci)
VIS, multi-angle radiometers only day, 1/20km res, only sensitive to clouds with COD>2: Ci over low cld -> low cldmulti-angle scattering -> cld top Polarization -> CT independent phase
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
7
IR,NIR,VIS radiometers:IR,NIR,VIS radiometers:
ISCCPISCCP geo+leo, 3h / 5km; VIS-IR -> CT, COD; AVHRR VIS-NIR -> CRE,CWP• only dataset that directly resolves diurnal cycle & covers only dataset that directly resolves diurnal cycle & covers whole globewhole globe• most thoroughly evaluated most thoroughly evaluated ((≥ 37 articles)≥ 37 articles)• has proven its extreme usefulness in many cloud studieshas proven its extreme usefulness in many cloud studiescld detection based on spatial and temporal variability; operational TOVS atm profiles
PATMOSxPATMOSx 7:30 /1:30; 5km; 11m, 12m -> CT,CEM; 0.6m,3.8m -> COD,CWP,CRE)7 scene types; OE cld retrieval; NCEP atm profiles
ATSR-GRAPEATSR-GRAPE 10:30; 1km; 0.7,0.9,1.6,11,12m ->COD,CRE,CP,Tsurf,phaseOE cld retrieval; ECMWF atm profiles
Particularities of datasets:
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
8
IR Sounders:IR Sounders: 5-8 channels around 14mCO2 abs band -> CP, CEM sensitive to thin cirrus (COD > 0.1), also in case of multi-layer clouds; day and night
HIRS-NOAAHIRS-NOAA (7:30/1:30; 17km, <32°)ISCCP like cloud setection, CO2 slicing for CP < 650 hPa, else opaque CT (CT-ST<-3/-5K o/l)NCEP atm profiles
TOVS Path-BTOVS Path-B (7:30/1:30; 17/100km); AIRS-LMDAIRS-LMD (1:30;13km)multi-spectral cld detection, weighted 2 method, providing unbiased CP for hgh & low cloudsretrieved atm profiles
active lidar:active lidar:CALIPSO CALIPSO (1:30, 70mx5km)
ST:ST: hor av: 5/20/80km for cld detection -> includes subvisible Ci, CT at top
GOCCP:GOCCP: vert av
Particularities of datasets:
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
9
IR,NIR,VIS + CO2 abs band:IR,NIR,VIS + CO2 abs band:
MODISMODIS (10:30/1:30;1km)
ST:ST: multispectral cld detection, CO2 slicing -> CP,CT,CEM; NCEP atm profilessubsample of well determined clds: COD,CWP,CRE (2.1m)
CECE: multispectral cld detection (0.7,2.1,3.8,11,12m), CT-COD, (VIS-3.8m)CWP,CRE; GMAO atm profiles
multi-anglemulti-angle VIS radiometers: VIS radiometers:
MISRMISR (10:30; 1/17km) COD>2, CZ at top (multi-angle reflectance)
POLDERPOLDER (1:30; 6/20km) O2 abs band -> CP (below midlevel of cld) ; Rayleigh scat CP (only 2/3 of clds (scatt angle 80-120°))polarization -> phase
Particularities of datasets:
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
10
Global Climate Observing System Target Requirements: Cloud Essential Climate Variables (2011 update)
Variable Horizontal Res
Vertical Res
Temporal Res
Accuracy Stability (/decade)
CA 50km N/A 3hr 0.01 – 0.05 0.003 – 0.03
CP 50km NA 3hr 15hPa – 50hPa 3hPa -15hPa
CT 50km NA 3hr 1K – 5K 0.2K – 1K
CWP 50km NA 3hr 25% 5%
CRE 50km NA 3hr 5-10% 1-2%
assuming cloud feedback similar to rad forcing of 0.3Wm-2 (~ 20% of current GHG forcing)
radiative forcing depends on CAE (and not CA)
=> target ranges (low for opt thick/ low clouds - high for opt thin cirrus (CEM=0.2))
based on NISTIR 7047 report (March 2004)
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
11
Quantity ± instantaneous error / mean error (Rossow)
• CA ± 12% 5% • CT ± 3-6 K 2 K• CZ ± 0.5-2 km 0.3 km • COD ± 25% 10%• CLWP ± 10% 10% • CIWP ± 30% 100% • CREL ± 1 m 1 m• CREI ± 3 m 10 m
• CT base ± 3-6K 2K (SOBS, Warren)
• CZ base ± 0.5-1 km 0.3 km
ISCCP cloud property uncertainty estimates
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
12
CA: 0.05 – 0.15largest over deserts & Antarctica
CP: ~40-50 hPa slightly smaller for AIRS
hgh / low clds:
CT: 4K/ 2-4K
CEM: 0.05 / 0.10-0.25
CEMH
CEML
CTH
CTL
CA CP
AIRS
TOVSB
TOVS PathB/AIRS-LMD cloud property uncertainty estimates
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
13
ISCCP cloud property bias estimates
missing thin Ci, under/over-estimation polar summer / winter
25-30% of midlevel clouds = thin Ci (night or over low cld)
CT of very thin Ci too low in tropics
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
1414
Interprétation des propriétés nuageuses
global CA 60-70% (+ 5% subvisible Ci) : 40% high , 40% single layer low
CAHR (hgh clds out of all clds) depends on sensitivity to thin Ci (misidentified as midlevel clouds by ISCCP, ATSR, POLDER)
CAE (effective CA=CA weighted by cld emissivity) agrees better
global monthly variability of CA: 20%-30% of CAE: 0.25-0.30
Interpretation of cloud properties from satellite observations
CALIPSO only considers uppermost layers to better compare with the other data sets
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
1515
Interprétation des propriétés nuageuses
15% more clouds over ocean than over land (low clouds),
whereas over land there are more high and midlevel clouds
The latter are optically thinner over land, so that effective cloud amount of those is similar
Differences ocean - land
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
16
Relative High cloud amount (CAHR)
CAHR depends on sensitivity to thin Ci:CALIPSO > TOVS/AIRS MODIS/PATMOS > ISCCP > MISRgeographical distributions similar(except HIRS, MISR )
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
17
Relative Low cloud amount
geographical distributions similar(except desert )
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
18
latitudinal & seasonal
variations similar (except HIRS CALR in SHtrp)
HC
A/C
ALC
A/C
A
Latitudinal & seasonal variation of uppermost cloud layers
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
19
CALIPSO: including subvis Ci, T(cld top) passive remote sensing: T(rad. cld height)
=> CTH(CALIPSO) should be lowest & nearest to tropopause,largest latitudinal variability(PATMOSX should not be like CALIPSO for high clouds)
CT distributions reflect decrease of vertical extent of troposphere from tropics to poles
SHtrp
SHmid
SHpol
K
Cloud temperature:Cloud temperature:latitudinal variationlatitudinal variation & & distributionsdistributions
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
20
Tropical high clouds: Tcld distributions
TOVS-BTOVS-BISCCPISCCPPATMOSXPATMOSXMODIS-CEMODIS-CEAIRSAIRSCALIPSO:CALIPSO:all all >0.1 >0.1 >0.2 O>0.2 O
0°-30°
SH
Tcld h
igh
(K
)
ocean ISCCPISCCP CALIPSO CALIPSO TOVSTOVS AIRSAIRS
Clouds in tropics have diffuse cloud tops:
CALIPSO max backscatter ≥ 1km below cloud top
AIRS-LMD:___ cld > 0.95
--- 0.95 > cld > 0.50…. 0.50 > cld > 0.05
midlatitudes
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
21
10° x 10° regions of typical climate regimes with increasing small scale variations:(1 – <COD(rad)>/<COD(lin)>)
Specific regions, Specific regions, compared to globecompared to globeRossow et al. J. Clim. 2002
1: SH Str Africa 2: SH Str America3: SH midlat 4: NH EPacific 5: NAtlantic storms6: SH Ci off America 7: SH Ci Amazon8: SH Cb Africa 9: NH Cb Indonesia10: ARM Southern Great Plain
Strcum regions (1,2): average CAHR, but optically thin
Storm regions (3,4,5): largest CANAtlantic (5): smaller CAHR & monthly CT variability
ITCZ (8,9): largest CAHR (small CEMH, linked to Ci) & largest monthly CT variability
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
22
Whereas CA, CEM,CT, CP of the data base are well understood,differences in CRE and CWP have still to be further explored
Global averages of CREW / CREI(H) agree quite well with 15m / 25m
IR sounders determine CREIH, CIWPH only for a subsample: semi-transparent ice cloudsCIWPH is much smaller (25 gm-2) than averaged over all ice clouds (~100gm-2)VIS-IR methods: MODIS-ST / ATSR-GRAPE much larger values than ISCCP / MODIS-CE / PATMOSX
distributions are not Gaussian ….
Bulk microphysical properties:Bulk microphysical properties: eff. liquid / ice particle radiuseff. liquid / ice particle radius & & liquid / ice water pathliquid / ice water path
------ monthly mean variability
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
23
CREW distributions agree quite well, with a large peak around 11m, small peak at 42 m from ISCCP (perhaps water cloud misidentification) CREIH: IR sounders, ISCCP: large peak at 32 m,second peak of ISCCP at 18 m (at top for opt thick clouds)peaks of MODIS-ST and ATSR-GRAPE at 27 m
eff. particle radiuseff. particle radius & & water pathwater pathdistributionsdistributions
CLWP: large peak at 80 gm-2
CIWPH: AIRS, TOVS compact distribution between 5 & 100 gm-
2; ISCCP, PATMOSX large peak at 4 gm-2 (regions with low clouds clouds?)further investigations
necessary!
m
liquid
ice
gm-2
liquid
ice
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
24
climate change studiesclimate change studies: be aware of temporal changes in coverage!MODIS at high latitudes more than 1 orbit passages, all others have kept only 1 passage ISCCP nearly 100% coverage – MISR / ATSR 20% - CALIPSO 5%Interannual variability increases with decreasing Interannual variability increases with decreasing Earth coverage!Earth coverage!
Monitoring of Earth coverageMonitoring of Earth coverage
0900AM0130AM
1030AM
0730AM
1030AM
0130AM
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
25
Global CA anomalies
global CA within global CA within ±±2.5% 2.5% ((~ ~ interannual & monthly mean interannual & monthly mean variability)variability)possible origins of variability:possible origins of variability:• changing average view angle changing average view angle (decreasing with nb of covering geo (decreasing with nb of covering geo sat for ISCCP) sat for ISCCP) • satellite drift satellite drift (for NOAA polar afternoon satellites)(for NOAA polar afternoon satellites)• change in Earth coverage, …..
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
26
trend analysis -> synergy of different variables
Europe
5
7,5
10
12,5
15
17,5
20
22,5
25
87,5 88 88,5 89 89,5 90 90,5 91 91,5 92 92,5 93 93,5 94 94,5 95
time (years)
eff.
clou
d am
ount
pot. Contrailsclr+thin Ci
Stubenrauch and Schumann GRL 2005
use TOVS upper tropospheric relative humidity to extract meteorological situations favorable for contrail formation
example: persistent contrails
-> detection of increase of thin cirrus over Europe (& North Atlantic Flight corridor)2.8-3.5% (±1.5%) per decade ~0.19% - 0.25% per decade (all situations)
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
27
example: tropical convection penetrating into the lower stratosphere
cluster analysis of ISCCP DX data (Rossow & Pearl GRL 2007)
mostly larger, organized, convective systems penetrate stratosphere
Longterm datasets -> explore rare events
pene
trat
ion
freq
uenc
y
cluster size
pene
trat
ion
freq
uenc
y
cluster size
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
28
diurnal cycle of clouds Cairns, Atm. Res. 1995
ISCCP C2, Complex Empirical Orthogonal Functions, project. on distorted diurnal harmonics
Low clouds over land: significant diurnal cycle, max early afternoon
Low clouds over ocean: max in early morning
High clouds: max in evening
Mid clouds: max in early morning or late at night (-> cirrus : TOVS analysis)
Stubenrauch et al. 2006
near noon
early evening
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
29
ConclusionsConclusionsSatellite instruments:
unique possibility to study cloud properties over long period
•only dataset that directly resolves diurnal cycle & covers only dataset that directly resolves diurnal cycle & covers whole globewhole globe• most thoroughly evaluated most thoroughly evaluated ((≥ 37 articles)≥ 37 articles)• has proven its extreme usefulness in many cloud studieshas proven its extreme usefulness in many cloud studies
To produce a common data base is challenging (GEWEX Cloud Assessment activity not funded)
However, once the data base is reliable, it provides a wealth of information for climate studies & model evaluation
So far statistical analyses:geographical distributions, latitudinal & seasonal variations agree quite welldifferences can be mostly understood by different sensitivities to cirrus,
(problems in retrieval methods, misidentification water-ice clouds)monitoring of cloud properties very difficult (need synergy of different variables)
ESA Cloud_CCI project (Climate Change Initiative) includes assessment activities& another cloud assessment workshop is foreseen at the end of the project (2013)
April 2011 WOAP assessment workshop, Frascati
30
Longterm datasets:good statistics on seasonal cycles; explore rare events; trend analysis difficult (synergy of variables)
Synergy of different data sets & variables very important:
Evaluation of climate models by comparing correlations!
70% (+10%) clouds: ~ 40% high clouds & ~40% single-layer low clouds
geographical cloud structures and seasonal cycles agree quite wellabsolute values depend on instrument sensitivity (& retrieval method)IR sounders passive instruments most sensitive to cirrus
A-Train: unique possibility to evaluate IR sounder retrieval & to give insight into vertical structure of different cloud types