Search

A major source of uncertainty in both climate projections and seasonal forecasting of sea ice is inadequate representation of surface–atmosphere exchange processes. The observations needed to improve understanding and reduce uncertainty in surface exchange parameterizations are challenging to make and rare. Here we present a large dataset of ship-based measurements of surface momentum exchange (surface drag) in the vicinity of sea ice from the Arctic Clouds in Summer Experiment (ACSE) in July–October 2014, and the Arctic Ocean 2016 experiment (AO2016) in August–September 2016. The combined dataset provides an extensive record of momentum flux over a wide range of surface conditions spanning the late summer melt and early autumn freeze-up periods, and a wide range of atmospheric stabilities. Surface exchange coefficients are estimated from in situ eddy covariance measurements. The local sea-ice fraction is determined via automated processing of imagery from ship-mounted cameras. The surface drag coefficient, CD10n, peaks at local ice fractions of 0.6–0.8, consistent with both recent aircraft-based observations and theory. Two state-of-the-art parameterizations have been tuned to our observations, with both providing excellent fits to the measurements.

Aircraft observations from two Arctic field campaigns are used to characterize and model surface heat and moisture exchange over the marginal ice zone (MIZ). We show that the surface roughness lengths for heat and moisture over uninterrupted sea ice vary with roughness Reynolds number ( ; itself a function of the roughness length for momentum, , and surface wind stress), with a peak at the transition between aerodynamically smooth ( <0.135) and aerodynamically rough ( >2.5) regimes. A pre-existing theoretical model based on surface-renewal theory accurately reproduces this peak, in contrast to the simple parameterizations currently employed in two state-of-the-art numerical weather prediction models, which are insensitive to . We propose a new, simple parameterization for surface exchange over the MIZ that blends this theoretical model for sea ice with surface exchange over water as a function of sea ice concentration. In offline tests, this new scheme performs much better than the existing schemes for the rough conditions observed during the ‘Iceland Greenland Seas Project’ field campaign. The bias in total turbulent heat flux across the MIZ is reduced to only 13 W m−2 for the new scheme, from 48 and 80 W m−2 for the Met Office Unified Model and ECMWF Integrated Forecast System schemes, respectively. It also performs marginally better for the comparatively smooth conditions observed during the ‘Aerosol-Cloud Coupling and Climate Interactions in the Arctic’ field campaign. The new surface exchange scheme has the benefit of being physically-motivated, comparatively accurate and straightforward to implement, although to reap the full benefits an improvement to the representation of sea ice topography via is required.

The Iceland and Greenland Seas are a crucial region for the climate system, being the headwaters of the lower limb of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. Investigating the atmosphere–ocean–ice processes in this region often necessitates the use of meteorological reanalyses—a representation of the atmospheric state based on the assimilation of observations into a numerical weather prediction system. Knowing the quality of reanalysis products is vital for their proper use. Here we evaluate the surface‐layer meteorology and surface turbulent fluxes in winter and spring for the latest reanalysis from the European Centre for Medium‐Range Weather Forecasts, i.e., ERA5. In situ observations from a meteorological buoy, a research vessel, and a research aircraft during the Iceland–Greenland Seas Project provide unparalleled coverage of this climatically important region. The observations are independent of ERA5. They allow a comprehensive evaluation of the surface meteorology and fluxes of these subpolar seas and, for the first time, a specific focus on the marginal ice zone. Over the ice‐free ocean, ERA5 generally compares well to the observations of surface‐layer meteorology and turbulent fluxes. However, over the marginal ice zone, the correspondence is noticeably less accurate: for example, the root‐mean‐square errors are significantly higher for surface temperature, wind speed, and surface sensible heat flux. The primary reason for the difference in reanalysis quality is an overly smooth sea‐ice distribution in the surface boundary conditions used in ERA5. Particularly over the marginal ice zone, unrepresented variability and uncertainties in how to parameterize surface exchange compromise the quality of the reanalyses. A parallel evaluation of higher‐resolution forecast fields from the Met Office's Unified Model corroborates these findings.

© The Author(s), 2019. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Renfrew, I. A., Pickart, R. S., Vage, K., Moore, G. W. K., Bracegirdle, T. J., Elvidge, A. D., Jeansson, E., Lachlan-Cope, T., McRaven, L. T., Papritz, L., Reuder, J., Sodemann, H., Terpstra, A., Waterman, S., Valdimarsson, H., Weiss, A., Almansi, M., Bahr, F., Brakstad, A., Barrell, C., Brooke, J. K., Brooks, B. J., Brooks, I. M., Brooks, M. E., Bruvik, E. M., Duscha, C., Fer, I., Golid, H. M., Hallerstig, M., Hessevik, I., Huang, J., Houghton, L., Jonsson, S., Jonassen, M., Jackson, K., Kvalsund, K., Kolstad, E. W., Konstali, K., Kristiansen, J., Ladkin, R., Lin, P., Macrander, A., Mitchell, A., Olafsson, H., Pacini, A., Payne, C., Palmason, B., Perez-Hernandez, M. D., Peterson, A. K., Petersen, G. N., Pisareva, M. N., Pope, J. O., Seidl, A., Semper, S., Sergeev, D., Skjelsvik, S., Soiland, H., Smith, D., Spall, M. A., Spengler, T., Touzeau, A., Tupper, G., Weng, Y., Williams, K. D., Yang, X., & Zhou, S. The Iceland Greenland Seas Project. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 100(9), (2019): 1795-1817, doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0217.1., The Iceland Greenland Seas Project (IGP) is a coordinated atmosphere–ocean research program investigating climate processes in the source region of the densest waters of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation. During February and March 2018, a field campaign was executed over the Iceland and southern Greenland Seas that utilized a range of observing platforms to investigate critical processes in the region, including a research vessel, a research aircraft, moorings, sea gliders, floats, and a meteorological buoy. A remarkable feature of the field campaign was the highly coordinated deployment of the observing platforms, whereby the research vessel and aircraft tracks were planned in concert to allow simultaneous sampling of the atmosphere, the ocean, and their interactions. This joint planning was supported by tailor-made convection-permitting weather forecasts and novel diagnostics from an ensemble prediction system. The scientific aims of the IGP are to characterize the atmospheric forcing and the ocean response of coupled processes; in particular, cold-air outbreaks in the vicinity of the marginal ice zone and their triggering of oceanic heat loss, and the role of freshwater in the generation of dense water masses. The campaign observed the life cycle of a long-lasting cold-air outbreak over the Iceland Sea and the development of a cold-air outbreak over the Greenland Sea. Repeated profiling revealed the immediate impact on the ocean, while a comprehensive hydrographic survey provided a rare picture of these subpolar seas in winter. A joint atmosphere–ocean approach is also being used in the analysis phase, with coupled observational analysis and coordinated numerical modeling activities underway., The IGP has received funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation: Grant OCE-1558742; the U.K.’s Natural Environment Research Council: AFIS (NE/N009754/1); the Research Council of Norway: MOCN (231647), VENTILATE (229791), SNOWPACE (262710) and FARLAB (245907); and the Bergen Research Foundation (BFS2016REK01). We thank all those involved in the field work associated with the IGP, particularly the officers and crew of the Alliance, and the operations staff of the aircraft campaign.

© The Author(s), 2020. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Renfrew, I. A., Barrell, C., Elvidge, A. D., Brooke, J. K., Duscha, C., King, J. C., Kristiansen, J., Cope, T. L., Moore, G. W. K., Pickart, R. S., Reuder, J., Sandu, I., Sergeev, D., Terpstra, A., Vage, K., & Weiss, A. An evaluation of surface meteorology and fluxes over the Iceland and Greenland Seas in ERA5 reanalysis: the impact of sea ice distribution. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, (2020): 1-22, doi:10.1002/qj.3941., The Iceland and Greenland Seas are a crucial region for the climate system, being the headwaters of the lower limb of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. Investigating the atmosphere–ocean–ice processes in this region often necessitates the use of meteorological reanalyses—a representation of the atmospheric state based on the assimilation of observations into a numerical weather prediction system. Knowing the quality of reanalysis products is vital for their proper use. Here we evaluate the surface‐layer meteorology and surface turbulent fluxes in winter and spring for the latest reanalysis from the European Centre for Medium‐Range Weather Forecasts, i.e., ERA5. In situ observations from a meteorological buoy, a research vessel, and a research aircraft during the Iceland–Greenland Seas Project provide unparalleled coverage of this climatically important region. The observations are independent of ERA5. They allow a comprehensive evaluation of the surface meteorology and fluxes of these subpolar seas and, for the first time, a specific focus on the marginal ice zone. Over the ice‐free ocean, ERA5 generally compares well to the observations of surface‐layer meteorology and turbulent fluxes. However, over the marginal ice zone, the correspondence is noticeably less accurate: for example, the root‐mean‐square errors are significantly higher for surface temperature, wind speed, and surface sensible heat flux. The primary reason for the difference in reanalysis quality is an overly smooth sea‐ice distribution in the surface boundary conditions used in ERA5. Particularly over the marginal ice zone, unrepresented variability and uncertainties in how to parameterize surface exchange compromise the quality of the reanalyses. A parallel evaluation of higher‐resolution forecast fields from the Met Office's Unified Model corroborates these findings., This study was part of the Iceland Greenland Seas Project. Funding was from the NERC AFIS grant (NE/N009754/1), the ALERTNESS (Advanced models and weather prediction in the Arctic: enhanced capacity from observations and polar process representations) project (Research Council of Norway project number 280573), the Trond Mohn Foundation (BFS2016REK01), and the National Science Foundation grant OCE‐1558742. The Leosphere WindCube v2 and the Wavescan buoy are part of the OBLO (Offshore Boundary Layer Observatory) infrastructure funded by the Research Council of Norway (project number 227777).

Recent ice shelf retreat on the east coast of the Antarctic Peninsula has been principally attributed to atmospherically driven melt. However, previous studies on the largest of these ice shelves – Larsen C – have struggled to reconcile atmospheric forcing with observed melt. This study provides the first comprehensive quantification and explanation of the atmospheric drivers of melt across Larsen C, using 31‐months’ worth of observations from Cabinet Inlet, a 6‐month, high‐resolution atmospheric model simulation and a novel approach to ascertain the surface energy budget (SEB) regime. The dominant meteorological controls on melt are shown to be the occurrence, strength and warmth of mountain winds called foehn. At Cabinet Inlet, foehn occurs 15 % of the time and causes 45 % of melt. The primary effect of foehn on the SEB is elevated turbulent heat fluxes. Under typical, warm foehn conditions, this means elevated surface heating and melting, the intensity of which increases as foehn wind speed increases. Less commonly – during cooler‐than‐normal foehn windsover radiatively‐warmed ice – the relationship between wind speed and net surface heat flux reverses, which explains the seemingly contradictory results of previous studies. In the model, spatial variability in cumulative melt across Larsen C is largely explained by foehn, with melt maxima in inlets reflecting maxima in foehn wind strength. However, most accumulated melt (58%) occurs due to solar radiation in the absence of foehn. A broad north‐south gradient in melt is explained by the combined influence of foehn and non‐foehn conditions.

Remote sensing of night light emissions in the visible band offers a unique opportunity to directly observe human activity from space. This has allowed a host of applications including mapping urban areas, estimating population and GDP, monitoring disasters and conflicts. More recently, remotely sensed night lights data have found use in understanding the environmental impacts of light emissions (light pollution), including their impacts on human health. In this review, we outline the historical development of night-time optical sensors up to the current state of the art sensors, highlight various applications of night light data, discuss the special challenges associated with remote sensing of night lights with a focus on the limitations of current sensors, and provide an outlook for the future of remote sensing of night lights. While the paper mainly focuses on space borne remote sensing, ground based sensing of night-time brightness for studies on astronomical and ecological light pollution, as well as for calibration and validation of space borne data, are also discussed. Although the development of night light sensors lags behind day-time sensors, we demonstrate that the field is in a stage of rapid development. The worldwide transition to LED lights poses a particular challenge for remote sensing of night lights, and strongly highlights the need for a new generation of space borne night lights instruments. This work shows that future sensors are needed to monitor temporal changes during the night (for example from a geostationary platform or constellation of satellites), and to better understand the angular patterns of light emission (roughly analogous to the BRDF in daylight sensing). Perhaps most importantly, we make the case that higher spatial resolution and multispectral sensors covering the range from blue to NIR are needed to more effectively identify lighting technologies, map urban functions, and monitor energy use. © 2019 Elsevier Inc.