Search

Your search keyword '"I. Meinke"' showing total 7 results
Start Over Author "I. Meinke"
7 results on '"I. Meinke"'

1. Still normal? Near-real-time evaluation of storm surge events in the context of climate change

Author

X. Liu, I. Meinke, and R. Weisse

Subjects
Environmental technology. Sanitary engineering, TD1-1066, Geography. Anthropology. Recreation, Environmental sciences, GE1-350, Geology, QE1-996.5
Abstract

Storm surges represent a major threat to many low-lying coastal areas in the world. In the aftermath of an extreme event, the extent to which the event was unusual and the potential contribution of climate change in shaping the event are often debated. Commonly analyzes that allow for such assessments are not available right away but are only provided with often considerable time delay. To address this gap, a new tool was developed and applied to storm surges along the German North Sea and Baltic Sea coasts. The tool integrates real-time measurements with long-term statistics to put ongoing extremes or the course of a storm surge season into a climatological perspective in near real time. The approach and the concept of the tool are described and discussed. To illustrate the capabilities, several exemplary cases from the storm surge seasons 2018/2019 and 2019/2020 are discussed. It is concluded that the tool provides support in the near-real-time assessment and evaluation of storm surge extremes. It is further argued that the concept is transferable to other regions and/or coastal hazards.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. Stakeholder-based evaluation categories for regional climate services – a case study at the German Baltic Sea coast

Author

I. Meinke

Subjects
Science, Physics, QC1-999, Meteorology. Climatology, QC851-999
Abstract

In this study, categories, dimensions, and criteria for evaluating regional climate services are derived by a participatory approach with potential service users at the German Baltic Sea coast. The development is carried out within nine face-to-face interviews conducted with decision makers, working in climate sensitive sectors at the German Baltic Sea coast. Three main groups of categories were localized which seem to matter most to the considered stakeholders and which seem to be crucial evaluation categories for regional climate services: (1) credibility, (2) relevance, and (3) appropriateness. For each of these evaluation categories several dimensions emerged, indicating certain perspectives of stakeholder demands. When summarizing these evaluation categories and their dimensions, 13 evaluation criteria for regional climate services can be derived (see Table 1). The results show that stakeholders do mainly address components other than those found in the literature (e.g. inputs, process, outputs, outcomes, and impacts). This might indicate that an evaluation, following solely literature-based (non-participative) components, is not sufficient to localize deficiencies or efficiencies within a regional climate service, since it might lead to results which are not relevant for potential users.

Published
2017
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. On the comparability of knowledge transfer activities – a case study at the German Baltic Sea Coast focusing regional climate services

Author

I. Meinke

Subjects
Science, Physics, QC1-999, Meteorology. Climatology, QC851-999
Abstract

In this article the comparability of knowledge transfer activities is discussed by accounting for external impacts. It is shown that factors which are neither part of the knowledge transfer activity nor part of the participating institution may have significant impact on the potential usefulness of knowledge transfer activities. Differences in the potential usefulness are leading to different initial conditions of the knowledge transfer activities. This needs to be taken into account when comparing different knowledge transfer activities, e.g., in program evaluations. This study is focusing on regional climate services at the German Baltic Sea coast. It is based on two surveys and experiences with two identical web tools applied on two regions with different spatial coverage. The results show that comparability among science based knowledge transfer activities is strongly limited through several external impacts. The potential usefulness and thus the initial condition of a particular knowledge transfer activity strongly depends on (1) the perceived priority of the focused topic, (2) the used information channels, (3) the conformity between the research agenda of service providing institutions and information demands in the public, as well as (4) on the spatial coverage of a service. It is suggested to account for the described external impacts for evaluations of knowledge transfer activities. The results show that the comparability of knowledge transfer activities is limited and challenge the adequacy of quantitative measures in this context. Moreover, as shown in this case study, in particular regional climate services should be individually evaluated on a long term perspective, by potential user groups and/or by its real users. It is further suggested that evaluation criteria should be co-developed with these stakeholder groups.

Published
2017
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. Tropical and Subtropical Cloud Transitions in Weather and Climate Prediction Models: The GCSS/WGNE Pacific Cross-Section Intercomparison (GPCI)

Author

M. J. Miller, Carlos R. Mechoso, Christian Jakob, Paul A. Vaillancourt, Jason C. Cole, I. Meinke, Bodo Ritter, Adrian Lock, Roel Neggers, Johannes Karlsson, C. Ledrian, Burkhardt Rockel, F.J. Turk, Philippe Marquet, M. Bonazzola, William B. Rossow, S. Cardoso, David A. Randall, A. von Engeln, Hua-Lu Pan, Martin Köhler, H. Kitagawa, Jui-Lin Li, Anthony D. DelGenio, Y. Jiao, Ming Zhao, A. P. Siebesma, Dmitrii Mironov, João Paulo Teixeira, Pedro M. A. Miranda, Charmaine Franklin, Erik van Meijgaard, João P. A. Martins, Cecile Hannay, Charlotte A. DeMott, Pedro M. M. Soares, Akira Kuwano-Yoshida, Philip J. Rasch, Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), NASA-California Institute of Technology (CALTECH), Instituto Dom Luis, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal, National Center for Atmospheric Research [Boulder] (NCAR), Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique (UMR 8539) (LMD), Université Pierre et Marie Curie - Paris 6 (UPMC)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-École polytechnique (X)-École des Ponts ParisTech (ENPC)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Département des Géosciences - ENS Paris, École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS-PSL), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS-PSL), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL), Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis (CCCma), Environment and Climate Change Canada, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), Department of Atmospheric Science [Fort Collins], Colorado State University [Fort Collins] (CSU), Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research (CAWCR), Monash University [Melbourne], Stockholm University, Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA), European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), United Kingdom Meteorological Office, Exeter, United Kingdom, Centre national de recherches météorologiques (CNRM), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Observatoire Midi-Pyrénées (OMP), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD)-Université Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier (UT3), Université de Toulouse (UT)-Université de Toulouse (UT)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Centre National d'Études Spatiales [Toulouse] (CNES)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Météo-France -Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD)-Université Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier (UT3), Université de Toulouse (UT)-Université de Toulouse (UT)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Centre National d'Études Spatiales [Toulouse] (CNES)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Météo-France -Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences [Los Angeles] (AOS), University of California [Los Angeles] (UCLA), University of California (UC)-University of California (UC), Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch Instituut, De Bilt, Netherlands, Experimental Climate Prediction Center [San Diego], University of California [San Diego] (UC San Diego), Research and Development Division, Deutscher Wetterdienst, Offenbach, Germany, NCEP Environmental Modeling Center (EMC), NOAA National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)-National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Institute for Coastal Research, GKSS Research Centre, Geesthacht, Germany, City College of New York [CUNY] (CCNY), City University of New York [New York] (CUNY), Canadian Meteorological Centre (CMC), European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT), NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Département des Géosciences - ENS Paris, École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS Paris), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS Paris), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-École des Ponts ParisTech (ENPC)-École polytechnique (X)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Pierre et Marie Curie - Paris 6 (UPMC), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Météo France-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), University of California-University of California, and CREST, The City College of New York, New York, NY, United States

Subjects
[SDU.OCEAN]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Ocean, Atmosphere, Convection, Atmospheric Science, 010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences, Meteorology, Cloud cover, Weather forecasting, Tropics, Cloud physics, Weather and climate, Subtropics, 010502 geochemistry & geophysics, computer.software_genre, 01 natural sciences, [SDU.STU.CL]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Earth Sciences/Climatology, 13. Climate action, Climatology, ddc:551, Environmental science, computer, Physics::Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences, Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment
Abstract

A model evaluation approach is proposed in which weather and climate prediction models are analyzed along a Pacific Ocean cross section, from the stratocumulus regions off the coast of California, across the shallow convection dominated trade winds, to the deep convection regions of the ITCZ—the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment Cloud System Study/Working Group on Numerical Experimentation (GCSS/WGNE) Pacific Cross-Section Intercomparison (GPCI). The main goal of GPCI is to evaluate and help understand and improve the representation of tropical and subtropical cloud processes in weather and climate prediction models. In this paper, a detailed analysis of cloud regime transitions along the cross section from the subtropics to the tropics for the season June–July–August of 1998 is presented. This GPCI study confirms many of the typical weather and climate prediction model problems in the representation of clouds: underestimation of clouds in the stratocumulus regime by most models with the corresponding consequences in terms of shortwave radiation biases; overestimation of clouds by the 40-yr ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-40) in the deep tropics (in particular) with the corresponding impact in the outgoing longwave radiation; large spread between the different models in terms of cloud cover, liquid water path and shortwave radiation; significant differences between the models in terms of vertical cross sections of cloud properties (in particular), vertical velocity, and relative humidity. An alternative analysis of cloud cover mean statistics is proposed where sharp gradients in cloud cover along the GPCI transect are taken into account. This analysis shows that the negative cloud bias of some models and ERA-40 in the stratocumulus regions [as compared to the first International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project (ISCCP)] is associated not only with lower values of cloud cover in these regimes, but also with a stratocumulus-to-cumulus transition that occurs too early along the trade wind Lagrangian trajectory. Histograms of cloud cover along the cross section differ significantly between models. Some models exhibit a quasi-bimodal structure with cloud cover being either very large (close to 100%) or very small, while other models show a more continuous transition. The ISCCP observations suggest that reality is in-between these two extreme examples. These different patterns reflect the diverse nature of the cloud, boundary layer, and convection parameterizations in the participating weather and climate prediction models.

Published
2011
Full Text
View/download PDF

5. Transferability Intercomparison: An Opportunity for New Insight on the Global Water Cycle and Energy Budget

Author

Raymond W. Arritt, Burkhardt Rockel, Colin Jones, A. Zadra, William J. Gutowski, I. Meinke, Eugene S. Takle, and John O. Roads

Subjects
Atmospheric Science, Meteorology, Climatology, Transferability, Global water cycle, Range (statistics), Environmental science, Climate model, Energy budget, Strengths and weaknesses
Abstract

A new approach, called transferability intercomparisons, is described for advancing both understanding and modeling of the global water cycle and energy budget. Under this approach, individual regional climate models perform simulations with all modeling parameters and parameterizations held constant over a specific period on several prescribed domains representing different climatic regions. The transferability framework goes beyond previous regional climate model intercomparisons to provide a global method for testing and improving model parameterizations by constraining the simulations within analyzed boundaries for several domains. Transferability intercomparisons expose the limits of our current regional modeling capacity by examining model accuracy on a wide range of climate conditions and realizations. Intercomparison of these individual model experiments provides a means for evaluating strengths and weaknesses of models outside their “home domains” (domain of development and testing). Reference sites that are conducting coordinated measurements under the continental-scale experiments under the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment (GEWEX) Hydrometeorology Panel provide data for evaluation of model abilities to simulate specific features of the water and energy cycles. A systematic intercomparison across models and domains more clearly exposes collective biases in the modeling process. By isolating particular regions and processes, regional model transferability intercomparisons can more effectively explore the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of predictability. A general improvement of model ability to simulate diverse climates will provide more confidence that models used for future climate scenarios might be able to simulate conditions on a particular domain that are beyond the range of previously observed climates.

Published
2007
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results