Status of US CRN. CRN What Are They? Why? Where?

Transcription

1 U.S. Climate Reference Network C. Bruce Baker, Michael R. Helfert NOAA/NCDC NOAA s Benchmark USA Climate Observing Network Designed to answer questions about National Temperature & Precipitation changes with the highest confidence Siting: 4 CONUS stations at pristine sites; shouldn t change in > years Instruments: Triple configuration temp. & precip. sensors & other measurements Observations every -minutes Hourly satellite data transmissions Standards Meets or Exceeds GCOS & CCSP Monitoring Principles NIST calibration standards Commissioned USCRN stations at CONUS Network build out in 8 CRN What Are They? Why? Where? CRN s are atmospheric observing networks which provide reference-quality climate data for detection and quantification of climate change. The goal is to provide high-confidence data irrefutable for decision-making on climate variance. Where might they be? Everyplace we can find: The 4-station USCRN in the Lower-48 States; Alaskan CRN (AKCRN, 9-33 stations); Hawaii & the Pacific CRN (PacCRN, ~ stations); USCRN Network Final Configuration, 8 (4 stations at 7 locations) Climate Reference Network Station for National-Level Climate Monitoring (Cornell University, Ithaca, New York) 3-wire weighing precipitation gauge with backup gauge inside a large wind fence with single alter. Satellite comms Relative Humidity (in test) Power Control 3 Solar Radiation (Pyranometer) 4 Anemometer Three High-Precision Platinum Resistance Ground Temperature Thermometers in Individual Ventilated Wetness Sensor Radiation Housings Soil Moisture & Soil Datalogger 88 th Annual Temperature American Meteorological (in Society test) Meeting Status of US CRN 87 field stations presently operating. additional stations being deployed late March. stations need deployment to finish network. Sustainable deployment rate is an average of ~ stations per month. Assuming April 8 start on last stations, completion date of late April 8 is possible. National Climate Variance Performance Measures of T = ± 98.% and P = ± 9.% will be achieved with network completion. 6 A National Integrated Drought Information System NIDIS and USCRN contributions USCRN provides critical data in drought monitoring Current: Surface temperature, precipitation, solar radiation, wind, wetness FY8/9 Activities: Soil moisture, soil temp. & rel. humidity sensors will be added to all (CONUS) sites Demonstrates versatility and expandability of USCRN design in meeting emerging requirements Overlay of drought monitoring assessment with USCRN station density (blue squares) at buildout (May 8) 4 stations CONUS

2 How close is USCRN completion? LA Lafayette 3 SE, University of Louisiana at Lafayette (Cade Farm) In the Lower 48 States (CONUS) there are 7 CRN stations operating. On its 8 completion, the USCRN network, the goal is to have 4 CONUS stations. USCRN Stations are Commissioned. Commissioning lag deploys by -3 months. National-level PM for T = 97.47% Goal 98% National-level PM for P = 93.9% Goal 9% USCRN stations remain to be deployed 7 8 ID Murphy W, ARS, NW Watershed Research Center AK Fairbanks NE, NOAA / NESDIS (FCDAS) 9 AZ Tucson W, Sonora Desert Museum CO Boulder 4 W, Mountain Research Station, INSTAAR, Univ. of CO (Hills Mill)

3 MN Goodridge NNW, Agassiz National Wildlife Refuge MT Wolf Point 9 ENE, Fort Peck Indian Reservation (Poplar River Site) 3 4 Just How Old Are CRN Stations? (-yr POR is the recommended base for Climate Purposes) Deploy Yr Stations & POR s ** stations with a 7 yr record 6 8 stations with a 6+ yr record 8 6 stations with a + yr record stations with a 4+ yr record stations with a 3+ yr record 8 stations with a + yr record stations with a + yr record 7 9 stations w/a.-7 yr record **4 in Alaska, in Hawaii, in Canada, 99 in CONUS, 3 GCOS & test sites Climate (?) T Variance Data ( F) for Barrow, Alaska CRN Station POR = only 6 Winters (Dec, Jan, Feb) Average Temperatures & Departures from Barrow NWS Coop Normals* (3 mi. SSW) Winter Temperature F) Departure ( F) *Normal T for DJF at Barrow is -3.4 deg F 6 Temperature ( F) Highest Air Temperature = 6 F Death Valley, CA July 6, 8. Lowest Air Temperature = - 6 F Barrow, AK. Highest Ground Surface Temperature = 6 F Death Valley, CA June 4, 6. Lowest Ground Surface Temperature = - 6 F Barrow, AK

4 CRN PRECIPITATION RECORDS (Inches) Winter Surface temperatures (DEC-FEB) Barrow, AK (November -September 8) Greatest Minute =.73 Titusville, FL JUL. 7, 6.73 Lander, WY JUL., 7 Greatest Minute =.89 Titusville, FL JUL. 7, 6 Greatest 3 Minute = 3.8 Titusville, FL JUL. 7, 6 Greatest 6 Minute = 3.77 Titusville, FL JUL. 7, 6 Greatest Day =.78 Quinault, WA Nov. 6,6 Greatest Day =. Quinault, WA Nov. -6, 6 Greatest 7 Day = 7.39 Quinault, WA Nov. -8, 6 Greatest 3 Day =.3 Quinault, WA Nov. -3, 6 Greatest 36 Day = 84.9 Quinault, WA Oct 6-3 Sep DURHAM SSW Kingston, RI NW Kingston, RI W DURHAM N THERE HAVE BEEN SOME DESIGN ISSUES! Polar Bear modifications at Barrow, AK This is not an icicle 3 This is not a new CRN shield design 4 4

5 COUNSELING FOR ANGER MANAGEMENT Climate Reference Network Future Soil Moisture/Soil temperature starting FY8 Relative Humidity starting FY8 First deployment ~ stations in Alabama 3 CRN and the rest HCN-M Finish Network of ~4 stations Spring/Summer FY8 Move part of the Precipitation testbed to EROS data Center Develop protocols and QA/QC for Soil Moisture/Soil Temperature and Relative Humidity Installations in FY8 Potential funding for the Alaska CRN FY8 Develop Climate Products for drought, weather extremes, and remote sensing validation URL Inch non-recording gauge with Alter Shield- Sterling Ott Gauge with Tretyakov Shield 9 3

6 Geonor with Double Alter Shield- Sterling 3 3 GEONOR GEONOR SDFIR SOLID PRECIPITATION 7 EVENTS 3-8 STERLING PRECIPITATION TESTBED.8.6 y =.8x R = GEONOR OTT AWPAG #.8.6 y =.9369x -..4 R. = OTT AWPAG GEONOR GEONOR OTT AWPAG #.8.6 y =.968x R = GEONOR OTT AWPAG #3.8.6 y =.9786x R = OTT AWPAG OTTAWAPAG " UNSHIELDED GEONOR. y =.89x -.7. R = " GAUGE GEONOR SDFIR GEONOR VS GEONOR SOLID PRECIPITATION EVENTS STERLING y =.63x R = GEONOR SDFIR GEONOR 8" DFIR.4. y =.93x -.3 R = " DFIR GEONOR SDFIR GEONOR SDFIR VS GEONOR DOUBLE ALTER.8.6 y =.9734x R = GEONOR DBL ALTER

7 GEONOR VS GEONOR SDFIR GEONORSDFIR GEONOR SDFIR GEONOR DBL ALTER y =.966x +.7. R = GEONORDBLALTER GEONOR/SDFIR VAISALA/DBL ALTER.8.6 y =.4x R = GEONOR/SDFIR GEONOR/SDFIR VS VAISALA/DBL ALTER y =.98x R = GEONOR/SDFIR The NCAR/Marshall Test Facility ) Current efforts are focused on the measurement of snow and other winter precipitation using gauges with adequate wind shields supported by FAA, USWRP and NOAA (FY 9-) funding. ) Results to date suggest that both the design of the wind shield and the prevention of snow accumulation on the sidewalls of the gauge are important factors to consider in determining the optimal configuration. 3) The Marshall Test Facility includes a WMO reference wind shield (double fence intercomparison reference, DFIR) in addition to the Wyoming, Alter, and two new wind shields. GEONOR gauges were tested inside these wind shields during the winter of 998/99 to evaluate gauge performance under a range of wind speeds

8 ITALIAN AIR FORCE METEOROLOGICAL SERVICE RESMA The WMO Field Intercomparison of Rain Intensity Gauges Ruedi, I., Lanzinger, E., Leroy, M., Baker, B., Vuerich, E., Stagi, L. and L.G. Lanza Background and Objectives The Intercomparison field site Initial Results WMO User requirements: - Meteo-hydrological warnings - Interfacing meteorological and hydrological models - Flood forecasting, disaster prevention and mitigation - Urban hydrology, engineering design -etc. Rainfall Intensity (RI) (lack of knowledge, practice, standardisation, recommendations, measurement instruments, etc.) Amount of precipitation collected per unit time interval First WMO Field Intercomparison of Rainfall Intensity (RI) Gauges Vigna di Valle (Roma) October 788 th October Annual American 8Meteorological Society Meeting 47 Expert Meeting on Rainfall Intensity Measurements Bratislava (Slovakia), April. to mm h - full range. to. mm h - rep. as trace Output averaging time: minute Intercomparison RI Measurement Instruments Maximum error in RI measurements: I phase: Laboratory tests (counting errors in. to mm h - :. mm h - controlled conditions) to mm h - : % II phase: Field Intercomparison (catching errors in env. conditions) 48 8

9 Previous related WMO Intercomparisons:. International Comparison of National Precipitation Gauges with a Reference Pit Gauge (Sevruk et al., 984).. WMO Solid Precipitation Measurement Intercomparison (Goodison et al., 998). Precipitation intensity was investigated for the first time in the assessment of present weather systems:. WMO Intercomparison of Present Weather Sensors/Systems (Leroy et al., 998). but only for qualitative information (light, moderate, heavy) focus on rainfall accumulation low intensity rainfall (snow) overall effect of counting and catching errors Catching errors = The errors due to the weather conditions at the collector, as well as those related to wetting, splashing and evaporation processes. They indicate the ability of the instrument to collect the exact amount of water that applies from the definition of precipitation at the ground, i.e. the total water falling over the projection of the collector s area over the ground. Counting errors = Counting errors are on the other hand related to the ability of the instrument to sense correctly the amount of water that is collected by the instrument. They can be experienced both in catching and non-catching type of instruments, although in the latter case the assessment of such errors is very difficult, and 49 is hard to be performed in laboratory conditions. From Laboratory to Field Tests The main objective of the Laboratory Intercomparison was to test the performances of catchment type rainfall intensity gauges of different measuring principles under documented conditions. Laboratory controlled conditions constant flow rate reference flow rate counting errors Drawbacks: no real rainfall (variability, etc.) no catching errors no real operating conditions Follow-up in the field WMO Field Intercomparison of Rainfall Intensity Gauges Vigna di Valle (Rome) Started in October 7 List of rain gauges RIMCO 7499 (TB) Paar AP3 (TB) 3 Précis-Mecanique (TB) 4 Thies PT (TB) ETG R A, B (TB) 6 LSI DQO3 (TB) 7 SIAP UM7/I (TB) 8 CAE PMB A, B (TB) 9 Davis Rain collector II (TB) Lambrecht 88 (TB) PP4 MTX (TB) ARG Env. Meas. Ltd (TB) 3 MRW A, B (WG) 4 Vaisala VRG (WG) Ott PLUVIO (WG) 6 EWS PG (WG) 7 GEONOR T-B3 A, B (WG) 8 MPS TRwS (WG) 9 SA MIRRAD MPA-M (WG) Vaisala PWD (optical) Ott PARSIVEL (OD) Thies LPM (OD) 3 Vaisala WXT (acoustic) 4 Eigenbrodt ANS 4 (pressure) KNMI electrical raingauge (level) 6 PVK ATTEX "DROP" (Radar) AS AS 3 3B 4 6 G Gill windsonic (IMS-ReSMA) AS 4 Young 6 wind sensors + 4 Vaisala DRDA Rain detectors (USA) Ancillary sensors PTUR RotronicMA Temp/RH + Young 6-L Press + LycorX 88 rad. th Annual (IMS-ReSMA) American Meteorological Society Meeting A PTU R 6 A 7A 4 7 8A LAKE side 6 G * 8B 9 3 7B SE (7 ) Side *N. was moved to this position for technical reasons AS * AS 4 Preliminary test in the laboratory Univ. of Genoa Instantaneous (one minute) tests Error [%] + 4% Steady flow tests Error [%] Tipping-bucket PAAR 8346 Aggregation : min (original) without correction Ir [mm/h] Tipping-bucket PAAR 8346 Error 4 [%] Aggregation : min (original) without correction Tipping-bucket 3 CAE PMB with Average correction figures Ir [mm/h] -4 4 Ground-level Gauges in standard pits used as REFERENCE RAIN GAUGES Instruments disturbance wind effects (JEVONS( Effect, 86) Prof. Koschmider,, 934 The sunken rain gauge The influence of the form of the rain gauge on the air currents disappears The influence of the necessary catchment surface on the air currents in its vicinity is reduced to a minimum through the fact that this surface lies in the layer with the least air movement The influence of the turbulent vertical movements likewise reduced to a minimum, since these disappear at the earth s s surface th Annual American Meteorological Society Ir Meeting [mm/h]

10 WMO REFERENCE RAIN GAUGE PITS ITALY - EN3798: MRW R 7 cm 37, cm 7 cm PMB Steel bars Grids frames T-B3 A large Pit,7 meters deep was built and divided in 4 parts (4 pits) for hosting the working reference (4 different instruments). 4 standard galvanized steel gratings 87, x 87, x, cm (LxWxH) will be positioned on pit walls. Spaces:, x, cm. Accuracy: ±mm; Strips:3mm Initial results - - Robust brick walls 4 cm 87, cm WS (m/s) -min data RI ext vs RI ref [mm/h] RI ext RI ref RI ext -RI ref [mm/h]vs Wind [m/s[ m/s] of identical rain gauges 6 7