Transcript E3_Proshutinsky_NumericalIPY

Numerical International Polar Year
THEMES:
 NOAA activities for the second half of the IPY period

NOAA contributions to the IPY legacy
MOTIVATION:
 Historically, each IPY has been characterized by exploring new directions
of Arctic studies and employing new technologies. We propose that an
advanced numerical modelling component during IPY 2007-2008 would be a
major accomplishment for enhancing Arctic studies in the modern world.
 Model development and improvement represent the highest levels of
integration and synthesis. IPY will be a benchmark for Arctic studies so it
would be very timely to revaluate existing models and their results in
order to improve and revalidate them.
Andrey Proshutinsky and AOMIP group, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
NOAA Arctic Science Priorities Workshop, February 2-3 2005, Silver Spring, MD
Model development and improvement represent
the highest levels of integration and synthesis
Integration of
basic disciplines
Integration of latest
parameterizations based on
Oceanographic
process studies
Integration of data
Mathematics
Hydrologic
Ocean
Physics
Sea Ice
Physics
mixing
Atmospheric
Sea ice
convection
Ice ridging
Integration among models
Integration of model
results
RASN
GSFC
IARC
NCAR
IOS
ice
synoptic
Ice formation
and decay
eddies
Fresh water
RASM
NPS
AWI
decadal
Atlantic layer
NYU
UW
LLA
LLN
seasonal
Improved models,
diagnostics and
predictions of Arctic
system variability
THE CONCEPT
IPYs serve as benchmarks of Arctic climate states and, in principal,
differences between these states reflect Arctic climate change.
Unfortunately, the temporal resolution of IPYs does not resolve
natural climate cycling and much more information is needed for
robust conclusions.
 In order to fill the temporal and spatial informational gaps and
answer major questions related to the Arctic climate change, we
propose employing methods of numerical modeling, namely: a set of
Arctic numerical models (atmospheric, sea ice, oceanic, terrestrial,
coupled and uncoupled, regional and global) developed and run by
experts of the international community specifically to satisfy IPY
goals and objectives.
Proposed Activity:
Support investigations of Arctic Ocean climate
using numerical models
 At the IPY planning stage, model results can be used to assist in designing the
observational network.
 During IPY, operational models will diagnose and predict atmospheric, oceanic
and sea ice conditions to assist field activities and to optimally correct
observational schemes.
 After the IPY field phase, modelling will be used for Arctic atmosphere, sea ice,
ocean and terrestrial data reconstruction for the period of existing observations,
for near future predictions, and to resolve major questions of the Arctic climate
change processes with better accuracy.
 Arctic environmental data collected during IPYs will be used for model calibration
and validation and a reconstruction of forcing parameters. Through the interface
between regional Arctic modelling and global climate modelling, we will better
determine the interactive interdependencies between Arctic processes and global
climate variability.
 Employing a set of different Arctic models and internationally coordinating the
numerical experiments will guarantee the highest quality results and effective
solutions for coordinating IPY 2007-2008 observations.
The Mechanics
 There will be a steering committee to effectively manage and
coordinate the project. This committee will consist of project
investigators, colleagues from other disciplines, experts from other
IPY activities, and stakeholders. This committee will provide overall
project guidance, formulate numerical experiment strategy, and
develop international collaboration.
 List of core investigators includes (but is not limited to):
– Arctic Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (AOMIP) team
– Arctic Regional Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ARCMIP) team
– Sea Ice Model Intercomparison Project (SIMIP) team
Project Investigators
A. Proshutinsky
R. Gerdes
S. Hakkinen
D. Holland
G. Holloway
M. Johnson
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, USA
Alfred Wegener Institute, Germany
Goddard Space Flight Center, USA
New-York University, USA
Institute of Ocean Science, Canada
Institute of Marine Science, UAF, USA
H. Goose
M. Karcher, C. Koeberle
F. Kauker
W. Maslowski
M. Steele, J. Zhang
J. Wang, W. Hibler
N. Yakovlev,
E. Golubeva, G. Platov
Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Alfred Wegener Institute, Germany
Alfred Wegener Institute, Germany
Naval Postgraduate School, USA
University of Washington, USA
International Arctic Research Center, UAF, USA
Russian Academy of Science, Moscow
Russian Academy of Science, Novosibirsk