July 15, 2020
Journal Article

Toward Understanding the Simulated Phase Partitioning of Arctic Single-Layer Mixed-Phase Clouds in E3SM

Abstract

21 Mixed-phase clouds are widespread in the Arctic and have substantial impacts on the 22 surface energy budget, sea ice extent, and regional climate. Significant changes are found in the 23 modeled phase partitioning of Arctic mixed-phase clouds in the newly developed U.S. 24 Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) Atmosphere Model 25 version 1 (EAMv1) compared to its predecessor (CAM5/EAMv0). The mixed-phase clouds 26 simulated by EAMv1 is overly dominated by super-cool liquid which is often underestimated by 27 CAM5. Compared to CAM5, EAMv1 has made several important changes in its cloud physical 28 parameterizations, including using CLUBB to unify shallow convection, PBL turbulence, and 29 cloud macrophysics, as well as updating the MG two-moment cloud microphysics scheme and 30 using the CNT heterogeneous ice nucleation scheme to replace the Meyers scheme for mixed- 31 phase clouds. To understand which of the newly-implemented physical parameterizations is 32 responsible for the change of modeled mixed-phase cloud phase partitioning in EAMv1, 33 sensitivity tests are conducted by utilizing the short-term hindcast approach and results are 34 compared to the observations from the ARM Mixed-Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment (M-PACE) 35 field campaign. 36 It is found that although each scheme contributes to the decrease of cloud ice water 37 content (IWC) and increase of cloud liquid water content (LWC), only the combined effect of 38 CLUBB and CNT can explain the significant underestimation of IWC. By examining the budgets 39 of cloud microphysical processes, CLUBB is found to play a dominant role due to the fact that 40 CLUBB does not diagnoses cloud ice phase water in its assumed joint PDF method and thus may 41 not provide sufficient cloud ice to initialize ice phase microphysical processes such as the growth 42 of ice crystals through vapor deposition. Although a more effective heterogeneous ice nucleation 43 may alleviate the underestimation of IWC, the ice phase process in CLUBB requires urgent 44 attention in the future model development.

Revised: September 30, 2020 | Published: July 15, 2020

Citation

Zhang M., S. Xie, X. Liu, W. Lin, K. Zhang, H. Ma, and X. Zheng, et al. 2020. Toward Understanding the Simulated Phase Partitioning of Arctic Single-Layer Mixed-Phase Clouds in E3SM. Earth and Space Science 7, no. 7:e2020EA001125. PNNL-SA-146508. doi:10.1029/2020EA001125