Refreezing on the Greenland ice sheet: a comparison of parameterizations

Retention and refreezing of meltwater are acknowledged to be important processes for the mass budget of polar glaciers and ice sheets. Several parameterizations of these processes exist for use in energy and mass balance models. Due to a lack of direct observations, validation of these parameterizat...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: C. H. Reijmer, M. R. van den Broeke, X. Fettweis, J. Ettema, L. B. Stap
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2012-07-01
Series:The Cryosphere
Online Access:http://www.the-cryosphere.net/6/743/2012/tc-6-743-2012.pdf
id doaj-fab96140187d4d498992d4f00bc5d52d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-fab96140187d4d498992d4f00bc5d52d2020-11-25T00:47:23ZengCopernicus PublicationsThe Cryosphere1994-04161994-04242012-07-016474376210.5194/tc-6-743-2012Refreezing on the Greenland ice sheet: a comparison of parameterizationsC. H. ReijmerM. R. van den BroekeX. FettweisJ. EttemaL. B. StapRetention and refreezing of meltwater are acknowledged to be important processes for the mass budget of polar glaciers and ice sheets. Several parameterizations of these processes exist for use in energy and mass balance models. Due to a lack of direct observations, validation of these parameterizations is difficult. In this study we compare a set of 6 refreezing parameterizations against output of two Regional Climate Models (RCMs) coupled to an energy balance snow model, the Regional Atmospheric Climate Model (RACMO2) and the Modèle Atmosphérique Régional (MAR), applied to the Greenland ice sheet. In both RCMs, refreezing is explicitly calculated in a snow model that calculates vertical profiles of temperature, density and liquid water content. Between RACMO2 and MAR, the ice sheet-integrated amount of refreezing differs by only 4.9 mm w.e yr<sup>−1</sup> (4.5 %), and the temporal and spatial variability are very similar. For consistency, the parameterizations are forced with output (surface temperature, precipitation and melt) of the RCMs. For the ice sheet-integrated amount of refreezing and its inter-annual variations, all parameterizations give similar results, especially after some tuning. However, the spatial distributions differ significantly and the spatial correspondence between the RCMs is better than with any of the parameterizations. Results are especially sensitive to the choice of the depth of the thermally active layer, which determines the cold content of the snow in most parameterizations. These results are independent of which RCM is used to force the parameterizations.http://www.the-cryosphere.net/6/743/2012/tc-6-743-2012.pdf
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author C. H. Reijmer
M. R. van den Broeke
X. Fettweis
J. Ettema
L. B. Stap
spellingShingle C. H. Reijmer
M. R. van den Broeke
X. Fettweis
J. Ettema
L. B. Stap
Refreezing on the Greenland ice sheet: a comparison of parameterizations
The Cryosphere
author_facet C. H. Reijmer
M. R. van den Broeke
X. Fettweis
J. Ettema
L. B. Stap
author_sort C. H. Reijmer
title Refreezing on the Greenland ice sheet: a comparison of parameterizations
title_short Refreezing on the Greenland ice sheet: a comparison of parameterizations
title_full Refreezing on the Greenland ice sheet: a comparison of parameterizations
title_fullStr Refreezing on the Greenland ice sheet: a comparison of parameterizations
title_full_unstemmed Refreezing on the Greenland ice sheet: a comparison of parameterizations
title_sort refreezing on the greenland ice sheet: a comparison of parameterizations
publisher Copernicus Publications
series The Cryosphere
issn 1994-0416
1994-0424
publishDate 2012-07-01
description Retention and refreezing of meltwater are acknowledged to be important processes for the mass budget of polar glaciers and ice sheets. Several parameterizations of these processes exist for use in energy and mass balance models. Due to a lack of direct observations, validation of these parameterizations is difficult. In this study we compare a set of 6 refreezing parameterizations against output of two Regional Climate Models (RCMs) coupled to an energy balance snow model, the Regional Atmospheric Climate Model (RACMO2) and the Modèle Atmosphérique Régional (MAR), applied to the Greenland ice sheet. In both RCMs, refreezing is explicitly calculated in a snow model that calculates vertical profiles of temperature, density and liquid water content. Between RACMO2 and MAR, the ice sheet-integrated amount of refreezing differs by only 4.9 mm w.e yr<sup>−1</sup> (4.5 %), and the temporal and spatial variability are very similar. For consistency, the parameterizations are forced with output (surface temperature, precipitation and melt) of the RCMs. For the ice sheet-integrated amount of refreezing and its inter-annual variations, all parameterizations give similar results, especially after some tuning. However, the spatial distributions differ significantly and the spatial correspondence between the RCMs is better than with any of the parameterizations. Results are especially sensitive to the choice of the depth of the thermally active layer, which determines the cold content of the snow in most parameterizations. These results are independent of which RCM is used to force the parameterizations.
url http://www.the-cryosphere.net/6/743/2012/tc-6-743-2012.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT chreijmer refreezingonthegreenlandicesheetacomparisonofparameterizations
AT mrvandenbroeke refreezingonthegreenlandicesheetacomparisonofparameterizations
AT xfettweis refreezingonthegreenlandicesheetacomparisonofparameterizations
AT jettema refreezingonthegreenlandicesheetacomparisonofparameterizations
AT lbstap refreezingonthegreenlandicesheetacomparisonofparameterizations
_version_ 1725260175301935104