ALBERT

Description: The Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) was undertaken by NASA’s Global Modeling and Assimilation Office with two primary objectives: to place observations from NASA’s Earth Observing System satellites into a climate context and to improve upon the hydrologic cycle represented in earlier generations of reanalyses. Focusing on the satellite era, from 1979 to the present, MERRA has achieved its goals with significant improvements in precipitation and water vapor climatology. Here, a brief overview of the system and some aspects of its performance, including quality assessment diagnostics from innovation and residual statistics, is given. By comparing MERRA with other updated reanalyses [the interim version of the next ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-Interim) and the Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR)], advances made in this new generation of reanalyses, as well as remaining deficiencies, are identified. Although there is little difference between the new reanalyses in many aspects of climate variability, substantial differences remain in poorly constrained quantities such as precipitation and surface fluxes. These differences, due to variations both in the models and in the analysis techniques, are an important measure of the uncertainty in reanalysis products. It is also found that all reanalyses are still quite sensitive to observing system changes. Dealing with this sensitivity remains the most pressing challenge for the next generation of reanalyses. Production has now caught up to the current period and MERRA is being continued as a near-real-time climate analysis. The output is available online through the NASA Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC).

Description: Like all reanalysis efforts, the Modern Era Retrospective-Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) must contend with an inhomogeneous observing network. Here the effects of the two most obvious observing system epoch changes, the Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-A (AMSU-A) series in late 1998 and, to a lesser extent, the earlier advent of the Special Sensor Microwave Imager (SSM/I) in late 1987 are examined. These sensor changes affect model moisture and enthalpy increments and thus water and energy fluxes, since the latter result from model physics processes that respond sensitively to state variable forcing. Inclusion of the analysis increments in the MERRA dataset is a unique feature among reanalyses that facilitates understanding the relationships between analysis forcing and flux response. In stepwise fashion in time, the vertically integrated global-mean moisture increments change sign from drying to moistening and heating increments drop nearly 15 W m−2 over the 30 plus years of the assimilated products. Regression of flux quantities on an El Niño–Southern Oscillation sea surface temperature (SST) index analysis reveals that this mode of climate variability dominates interannual signals and its leading expression is minimally affected by satellite observing system changes. Conversely, precipitation patterns and other fluxes influenced by SST changes associated with Pacific decadal variability (PDV) are significantly distorted. Observing system changes also induce a nonstationary component to the annual cycle signals. Principal component regression is found useful for identifying artifacts produced by changes of satellite sensors and defining appropriate adjustments. After the adjustments are applied, the spurious flux trend components are greatly diminished. Time series of the adjusted precipitation and the Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP) data compare favorably on a global basis. The adjustments also provide a much better depiction of precipitation spatial trends associated with PDV-like forcing. The utility as well as associated drawbacks of this statistical adjustment and the prospects for future improvements of the methodology are discussed.

Description: Turbulent fluxes of heat and moisture across the atmosphere–ocean interface are fundamental components of the earth’s energy and water balance. Characterizing both the spatiotemporal variability and the fidelity of these exchanges of heat and moisture is critical to understanding the global water and energy cycle variations, quantifying atmosphere–ocean feedbacks, and improving model predictability. This study examines the veracity of the recently completed NASA Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) product in terms of its turbulent surface fluxes. This assessment employs a large dataset of directly measured turbulent fluxes as well as other turbulent surface flux datasets. The spatial and temporal variability of the surface fluxes are examined in terms of their annual-mean climatologies, their seasonal covariability of near-surface bulk parameters, and their representation of extremes. The impact of data assimilation on the near-surface parameters is assessed through evaluation of the incremental analysis update tendencies. It is found that MERRA turbulent surface fluxes are relatively accurate for typical conditions but have systematically weak vertical gradients in moisture and temperature and a weaker covariability between the near-surface gradients and wind speed than found in observations. This results in an underestimate of the surface latent and sensible heat fluxes over the western boundary current and storm-track regions. The assimilation of observations generally acts to bring MERRA closer to observational products by increasing moisture and temperature near the surface and decreasing the near-surface wind speeds.

Description: Components of the atmospheric energy budget from the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) are evaluated in polar regions for the period 1979–2005 and compared with previous estimates, in situ observations, and contemporary reanalyses. Closure of the budget is reflected by the analysis increments term, which indicates an energy surplus of 11 W m−2 over the North Polar cap (70°–90°N) and 22 W m−2 over the South Polar cap (70°–90°S). Total atmospheric energy convergence from MERRA compares favorably with previous studies for northern high latitudes but exceeds the available previous estimate for the South Polar cap by 46%. Discrepancies with the Southern Hemisphere energy transport are largest in autumn and may be related to differences in topography with earlier reanalyses. For the Arctic, differences between MERRA and other sources in top of atmosphere (TOA) and surface radiative fluxes are largest in May. These differences are concurrent with the largest discrepancies between MERRA parameterized and observed surface albedo. For May, in situ observations of the upwelling shortwave flux in the Arctic are 80 W m−2 larger than MERRA, while the MERRA downwelling longwave flux is underestimated by 12 W m−2 throughout the year. Over grounded ice sheets, the annual mean net surface energy flux in MERRA is erroneously nonzero. Contemporary reanalyses from the Climate Forecast Center (CFSR) and the Interim Re-Analyses of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ERA-I) are found to have better surface parameterizations; however, these reanalyses also disagree with observed surface and TOA energy fluxes. Discrepancies among available reanalyses underscore the challenge of reproducing credible estimates of the atmospheric energy budget in polar regions.

Description: Reanalysis products produced at the various centers around the globe are utilized for many different scientific endeavors, including forcing land surface models and creating surface flux estimates. Here, flux tower observations of temperature, wind speed, precipitation, downward shortwave radiation, net surface radiation, and latent and sensible heat fluxes are used to evaluate the performance of various reanalysis products [NCEP–NCAR reanalysis and Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR) from NCEP; 40-yr European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Re-Analysis (ERA-40) and ECMWF Interim Re-Analysis (ERA-Interim) from ECMWF; and Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) and Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) from the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)]. To combine the biases and standard deviation of errors from the separate stations, a ranking system is utilized. It is found that ERA-Interim has the lowest overall bias in 6-hourly air temperature, followed closely by MERRA and GLDAS. The variability in 6-hourly air temperature is again most accurate in ERA-Interim. ERA-40 is found to have the lowest overall bias in latent heat flux, followed closely by CFSR, while ERA-40 also has the lowest 6-hourly sensible heat bias. MERRA has the second lowest and is close to ERA-40. The variability in 6-hourly precipitation is best captured by GLDAS and ERA-Interim, and ERA-40 has the lowest precipitation bias. It is also found that at monthly time scales, the bias term in the reanalysis products are the dominant cause of the mean square errors, while at 6-hourly and daily time scales the dominant contributor to the mean square errors is the correlation term. Also, it is found that the hourly CFSR data have discontinuities present due to the assimilation cycle, while the hourly MERRA data do not contain these jumps.

Description: Reanalyses, retrospectively analyzing observations over climatological time scales, represent a merger between satellite observations and models to provide globally continuous data and have improved over several generations. Balancing the earth’s global water and energy budgets has been a focus of research for more than two decades. Models tend to their own climate while remotely sensed observations have had varying degrees of uncertainty. This study evaluates the latest NASA reanalysis, the Modern Era Retrospective-Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA), from a global water and energy cycles perspective, to place it in context of previous work and demonstrate the strengths and weaknesses. MERRA was configured to provide complete budgets in its output diagnostics, including the incremental analysis update (IAU), the term that represents the observations influence on the analyzed states, alongside the physical flux terms. Precipitation in reanalyses is typically sensitive to the observational analysis. For MERRA, the global mean precipitation bias and spatial variability are more comparable to merged satellite observations [the Global Precipitation and Climatology Project (GPCP) and Climate Prediction Center Merged Analysis of Precipitation (CMAP)] than previous generations of reanalyses. MERRA ocean evaporation also has a much lower value, which is comparable to independently derived estimate datasets. The global energy budget shows that MERRA cloud effects may be generally weak, leading to excess shortwave radiation reaching the ocean surface. Evaluating the MERRA time series of budget terms, a significant change occurs that does not appear to be represented in observations. In 1999, the global analysis increments of water vapor changes sign from negative to positive and primarily lead to more oceanic precipitation. This change is coincident with the beginning of Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit (AMSU) radiance assimilation. Previous and current reanalyses all exhibit some sensitivity to perturbations in the observation record, and this remains a significant research topic for reanalysis development. The effect of the changing observing system is evaluated for MERRA water and energy budget terms.

Description: The atmospheric moisture budget from the Modern Era Retrospective-Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) is evaluated in polar regions for the period 1979–2005 and compared with previous estimates, accumulation syntheses over polar ice sheets, and in situ Arctic precipitation observations. The system is based on a nonspectral background model and utilizes the incremental analysis update scheme. The annual moisture convergence from MERRA for the north polar cap is comparable to previous estimates using 40-yr European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Re-Analysis (ERA-40) and earlier reanalyses but it is more than 50% larger than MERRA precipitation minus evaporation (P − E) computed from physics output fields. This imbalance is comparable to earlier reanalyses for the Arctic. For the south polar cap, the imbalance is 20%. The MERRA physics output fields are also found to be overly sensitive to changes in the satellite observing system, particularly over data-sparse regions of the Southern Ocean. Comparisons between MERRA and prognostic fields from two contemporary reanalyses yield a spread of values from 6% of the mean over the Antarctic Ice Sheet to 61% over a domain of the Arctic Ocean. These issues highlight continued problems associated with the representation of cold-climate physical processes in global data assimilation models. The distribution of MERRA surface fluxes over the major polar ice sheets emphasizes larger values along the coastal escarpments, which agrees more closely with recent assessments of ice sheet accumulation using regional models. Differences between these results and earlier assessments illustrate a continued ambiguity in the surface moisture flux distribution over Greenland and Antarctica. The higher spatial and temporal resolution as well as the availability of all budget components, including analysis increments in MERRA, offer prospects for an improved representation of the high-latitude water cycle in reanalyses.

Description: Irrigation is an important human activity that may impact local and regional climate, but current climate model simulations and data assimilation systems generally do not explicitly include it. The European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Interim Re-Analysis (ERA-Interim) shows more irrigation signal in surface evapotranspiration (ET) than the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) because ERA-Interim adjusts soil moisture according to the observed surface temperature and humidity while MERRA has no explicit consideration of irrigation at the surface. But, when compared with the results from a hydrological model with detailed considerations of agriculture, the ET from both reanalyses show large deficiencies in capturing the impact of irrigation. Here, a back-trajectory method is used to estimate the contribution of irrigation to precipitation over local and surrounding regions, using MERRA with observation-based corrections and added irrigation-caused ET increase from the hydrological model. Results show substantial contributions of irrigation to precipitation over heavily irrigated regions in Asia, but the precipitation increase is much less than the ET increase over most areas, indicating that irrigation could lead to water deficits over these regions. For the same increase in ET, precipitation increases are larger over wetter areas where convection is more easily triggered, but the percentage increase in precipitation is similar for different areas. There are substantial regional differences in the patterns of irrigation impact, but, for all the studied regions, the highest percentage contribution to precipitation is over local land.

Description: Using data from seven global model operational analyses (OA), one land surface model, and various remote sensing retrievals, the energy and water fluxes over global land areas are intercompared for 2003/04. Remote sensing estimates of evapotranspiration (ET) are obtained from three process-based models that use input forcings from multisensor satellites. An ensemble mean (linear average) of the seven operational (mean-OA) models is used primarily to intercompare the fluxes with comparisons performed at both global and basin scales. At the global scale, it is found that all components of the energy budget represented by the ensemble mean of the OA models have a significant bias. Net radiation estimates had a positive bias (global mean) of 234 MJ m−2 yr−1 (7.4 W m−2) as compared to the remote sensing estimates, with the latent and sensible heat fluxes biased by 470 MJ m−2 yr−1 (13.3 W m−2) and −367 MJ m−2 yr−1 (11.7 W m−2), respectively. The bias in the latent heat flux is affected by the bias in the net radiation, which is primarily due to the biases in the incoming shortwave and outgoing longwave radiation and to the nudging process of the operational models. The OA models also suffer from improper partitioning of the surface heat fluxes. Comparison of precipitation (P) analyses from the various OA models, gauge analysis, and remote sensing retrievals showed better agreement than the energy fluxes. Basin-scale comparisons were consistent with the global-scale results, with the results for the Amazon in particular showing disparities between OA and remote sensing estimates of energy fluxes. The biases in the fluxes are attributable to a combination of errors in the forcing from the OA atmospheric models and the flux calculation methods in their land surface schemes. The atmospheric forcing errors are mainly attributable to high shortwave radiation likely due to the underestimation of clouds, but also precipitation errors, especially in water-limited regions.

Description: A quasi-isentropic, back-trajectory scheme is applied to output from the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) and a land-only replay with corrected precipitation to estimate surface evaporative sources of moisture supplying precipitation over every ice-free land location for the period 1979–2005. The evaporative source patterns for any location and time period are effectively two-dimensional probability distributions. As such, the evaporative sources for extreme situations like droughts or wet intervals can be compared to the corresponding climatological distributions using the method of relative entropy. Significant differences are found to be common and widespread for droughts, but not wet periods, when monthly data are examined. At pentad temporal resolution, which is more able to isolate floods and situations of atmospheric rivers, values of relative entropy over North America are typically 50%–400% larger than at monthly time scales. Significant differences suggest that moisture transport may be a key factor in precipitation extremes. Where evaporative sources do not change significantly, it implies other local causes may underlie the extreme events.