Search

The Arctic poses many challenges for Earth system and snow physics models, which are commonly unable to simulate crucial Arctic snowpack processes,such as vapour gradients and rain-on-snow-induced ice layers. These limitations raise concerns about the current understanding of Arctic warming and its impact on biodiversity, livelihoods, permafrost, and the global carbon budget. Recognizing that models are shaped by human choices, 18 Arctic researchers were interviewed to delve into the decision-making process behind model construction. Although data availability, issues of scale, internal model consistency, and historical and numerical model legacies were cited as obstacles to developing an Arctic snowpack model, no opinion was unanimous. Divergences were not merely scientific disagreements about the Arctic snowpack but reflected the broader research context. Inadequate and insufficient resources, partly driven by short-term priorities dominating research landscapes, impeded progress. Nevertheless, modellers were found to be both adaptable to shifting strategic research priorities – an adaptability demonstrated by the fact that interdisciplinary collaborations were the key motivation for model development – and anchored in the past. This anchoring and non-epistemic values led to diverging opinions about whether existing models were "good enough" and whether investing time and effort to build a new model was a useful strategy when addressing pressing research challenges. Moving forward, we recommend that both stakeholders and modellers be involved in future snow model intercomparison projects in order to drive developments that address snow model limitations currently impeding progress in various disciplines. We also argue for more transparency about the contextual factors that shape research decisions. Otherwise, the reality of our scientific process will remain hidden, limiting the changes necessary to our research practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accurate snow information at high spatial and temporal resolution is needed to support climate services, water resource management, and environmental prediction services. However, snow remains the only element of the water cycle without a dedicated Earth observation mission. The snow scientific community has shown that Ku-band radar measurements provide quality snow information with its sensitivity to snow water equivalent and the wet/dry state of snow. With recent developments of tools like the snow micropenetrometer (SMP) to retrieve snow microstructure data in the field and radiative transfer models like the Snow Microwave Radiative Transfer (SMRT) model, it becomes possible to properly characterize the snow and how it translates into radar backscatter measurements. An experiment at Trail Valley Creek (TVC), Northwest Territories, Canada, was conducted during the winter of 2018/19 in order to characterize the impacts of varying snow geophysical properties on Ku-band radar backscatter at a 100 m scale. Airborne Ku-band data were acquired using the University of Massachusetts radar instrument. This study shows that it is possible to calibrate SMP data to retrieve statistical information on snow geophysical properties and properly characterize a representative snowpack at the experiment scale. The tundra snowpack measured during the campaign can be characterize by two layers corresponding to a rounded snow grain layer and a depth hoar layer. Using RADARSAT-2 and TerraSAR-X data, soil background roughness properties were retrieved (msssoil=0.010±0.002), and it was shown that a single value could be used for the entire domain. Microwave snow grain size polydispersity values of 0.74 and 1.11 for rounded and depth hoar snow grains, respectively, were retrieved. Using the geometrical optics surface backscatter model, the retrieved effective soil permittivity increased from C-band (εsoil=2.47) to X-band (εsoil=2.61) and to Ku-band (εsoil=2.77) for the TVC domain. Using the SMRT and the retrieved soil and snow parameterizations, an RMSE of 2.6 dB was obtained between the measured and simulated Ku-band backscatter values when using a global set of parameters for all measured sites. When using a distributed set of soil and snow parameters, the RMSE drops to 0.9 dB. This study thus shows that it is possible to link Ku-band radar backscatter measurements to snow conditions on the ground using a priori knowledge of the snow conditions to retrieve snow water equivalent (SWE) at the 100 m scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accurate snow information at high spatial and temporal resolution is needed to support climate services, water resource management, and environmental prediction services. However, snow remains the only element of the water cycle without a dedicated Earth Observation mission. The snow scientific community has shown that Ku-Band radar measurements provide quality snow information with its sensitivity to snow water equivalent and the wet/dry state of snow. With recent developments of tools like the Snow MicroPenetrometer (SMP) to retrieve snow microstructure data in the field and radiative transfer models like the Snow Microwave Radiative Transfer Model (SMRT), it becomes possible to properly characterize the snow and how it translates into radar backscatter measurements. An experiment at Trail Valley Creek (TVC), Northwest Territories, Canada was conducted during the winter of 2018/19 in order to characterize the impacts of varying snow geophysical properties on Ku-Band radar backscatter at a 100-m scale. Airborne Ku-Band data was acquired using the University of Massachusetts radar instrument. This study shows that it is possible to calibrate SMP data to retrieve statistical information on snow geophysical properties and properly characterize a representative snowpack at the experiment scale. The tundra snowpack measured during the campaign can be characterize by two layers corresponding to a rounded snow grain layer and a depth hoar layer. Using Radarsat-2 and TerraSAR-X data, soil background roughness properties were retrieved (mss soil = 0.010±0.002) and it was shown that a single value could be used for the entire domain. Microwave snow grain size polydispersity values of 0.74 and 1.11 for rounded and depth hoar snow grains, respectively, was retrieved. Using the Geometrical Optics surface backscatter model, the retrieved effective soil permittivity increased from C-Band (ε soil = 2.47) to X-Band (ε soil = 2.61), to Ku-Band (ε soil = 2.77) for the TVC domain. Using SMRT and the retrieved soil and snow parameterizations, an RMSE of 2.6 dB was obtained between the measured and simulated Ku-Band backscatter values when using a global set of parameters for all measured sites. When using a distributed set of soil and snow parameters, the RMSE drops to 0.9 dB. This study thus shows that it is possible to link Ku-Band radar backscatter measurements to snow conditions on the ground using a priori knowledge of the snow conditions to retrieve SWE at the 100 m scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current global reanalyses show marked discrepancies in snow mass and snow cover extent for the Northern Hemisphere. Here, benchmark snow datasets are produced by driving a simple offline snow model, the Brown Temperature Index Model (B-TIM), with temperature and precipitation from each of three reanalyses. B-TIM offline snow performs comparably to or better than online (coupled land-atmosphere) reanalysis snow when evaluated against in situ snow measurements. Sources of discrepancy in snow climatologies, which are difficult to isolate when comparing online reanalysis snow products amongst themselves, are partially elucidated by separately bias-adjusting temperature and precipitation in B-TIM. Interannual variability in snow mass and snow spatial patterns is far more self-consistent amongst offline B-TIM snow products than amongst online reanalysis snow products, and specific artifacts related to temporal inhomogeneity in snow data assimilation are revealed in the analysis. B-TIM, released here as an open-source, self-contained Python package, provides a simple benchmarking tool for future updates to more sophisticated online and offline snow datasets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Estimates of winter (snow-covered non-growing season) CO2 fluxes across the Arctic region vary by a factor of 3.5, with considerable variation between measured and simulated fluxes. Measurements of snow properties, soil temperatures, and net ecosystem exchange (NEE) at Trail Valley Creek, NWT, Canada, allowed for the evaluation of simulated winter NEE in a tundra environment with the Community Land Model (CLM5.0). Default CLM5.0 parameterisations did not adequately simulate winter NEE in this tundra environment, with near-zero NEE (< 0.01 gCm-2d-1) simulated between November and mid-May. In contrast, measured NEE was broadly positive (indicating net CO2 release) from snow-cover onset until late April. Changes to the parameterisation of snow thermal conductivity, required to correct for a cold soil temperature bias, reduced the duration for which no NEE was simulated. Parameter sensitivity analysis revealed the critical role of the minimum soil moisture threshold of decomposition (Ψmin) in regulating winter soil respiration. The default value of this parameter (Ψmin) was too high, preventing simulation of soil respiration for the vast majority of the snow-covered season. In addition, the default rate of change of soil respiration with temperature (Q10) was too low, further contributing to poor model performance during winter. As Ψmin and Q10 had opposing effects on the magnitude of simulated winter soil respiration, larger negative values of Ψmin and larger positive values of Q10 are required to simulate wintertime NEE more adequately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We assess and rank 23 gridded snow water equivalent (SWE) products by implementing a novel evaluation strategy using a new suite of reference data from two cross-validated sources and a series of product inter-comparisons. The new reference data combines in situ measurements from both snow courses and airborne gamma measurements. Compared to previous evaluations of gridded products, we have substantially increased the spatial coverage and sample size across North America, and we are able to evaluate product performance across both mountain and non-mountain regions. The evaluation strategy we use ranks overall relative product performance while still accounting for individual differences in ability to represent SWE climatology, variability, and trends. Assessing these gridded products fills an important gap in the literature since individual gridded products are frequently chosen without prior justification as the basis for evaluating land surface and climate model outputs, along with other climate applications. The top performing products across the range of tests performed are ERA5-Land followed by the Crocus snow model. Our evaluation indicates that accurate representation of hemispheric SWE varies tremendously across the range of products. While most products are able to represent SWE reasonably well across Northern Hemisphere non-mountainous regions, the ability to accurately represent SWE in mountain regions and to accurately represent historical trends are much more variable. Finally, we demonstrate that for the ensemble of products evaluated here, attempts to assimilate surface snow observations and/or satellite measurements lead to a deleterious influence on regional snow mass trends, which is an important consideration for how such gridded products are produced and applied in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We use snow course and airborne gamma data available over North America to compare the validation of gridded snow water equivalent (SWE) products when evaluated with one reference dataset versus the other. We assess product performance across both non-mountainous and mountainous regions, determining the sensitivity of relative product rankings and absolute performance measures. In non-mountainous areas, product performance is insensitive to the choice of SWE reference dataset (snow course or airborne gamma): the validation statistics (bias, unbiased root mean squared error, correlation) are consistent with one another. In mountainous areas, the choice of reference dataset has little impact on relative product ranking but a large impact on assessed error magnitudes (bias and unbiased root mean squared error). Further analysis indicates the agreement in non-mountainous regions occurs because the reference SWE estimates themselves agree up to spatial scales of at least 50 km, comparable to the grid spacing of most available SWE products. In mountain areas, there is poor agreement between the reference datasets even at short distances (< 5 km). We determine that differences in assessed error magnitudes result primarily from the range of SWE magnitudes sampled by each method, although their respective spatiotemporal distribution and elevation differences between the reference measurements and grid centroids also play a role. We use this understanding to produce a combined reference SWE dataset for North America, applicable for future gridded SWE product evaluations and other applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Arctic poses many challenges to Earth System and snow physics models, which are unable to simulate crucial Arctic snowpack processes, such as vapour gradients and rain-on-snow-induced ice layers. These limitations raise concerns about the current understanding of Arctic warming and its impact on biodiversity, livelihoods, permafrost and the global carbon budget. Recognizing that models are shaped by human choices, eighteen Arctic researchers were interviewed to delve into the decision-making process behind model construction. Although data availability, issues of scale, internal model consistency, and historical and numerical model legacies were cited as obstacles to developing an Arctic snowpack model, no opinion was unanimous. Divergences were not merely scientific disagreements about the Arctic snowpack, but reflected the broader research context. Inadequate and insufficient resources partly driven by short-term priorities dominating research landscapes, impeded progress. Nevertheless, modellers were found to be both adaptable to shifting strategic research priorities – an adaptability demonstrated by the fact that interdisciplinary collaborations were the key motivation for model development – and anchored in the past. This anchoring led to diverging opinions about whether existing models are "good enough" and whether investing time and effort to build a new model was a useful strategy when addressing pressing research challenges. Moving forward, we recommend that both stakeholders and modellers be involved in future snow model intercomparison projects in order to drive developments that address snow model limitations that currently impede progress in various disciplines. We also argue for more transparency about the contextual factors that shape research decisions. Otherwise, the reality of our scientific process will remain hidden, limiting the changes necessary to our research practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]