Bruno Merz, Christian Kuhlicke, Michael Kunz, Massimiliano Pittore, Andrey Babeyko, David N. Bresch, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Frauke Feser, Inga Koszalka, Heidi Kreibich, Florian Pantillon, Stefano Parolai, Joaquim G. Pinto, Heinz Jürgen Punge, Eleonora Rivalta, Kai Schr?ter, Karen Strehlow, Ralf Weisse, Andreas Wurpts
Forecasting and early warning systems are important investments to protect lives, properties, and livelihood. While early warning systems are frequently used to predict the magnitude, location, and timing of potentially damaging events, these systems rarely provide impact estimates, such as the expected amount and distribution of physical damage, human consequences, disruption of services, or financial loss. Complementing early warning systems with impact forecasts has a twofold advantage: It would provide decision makers with richer information to take informed decisions about emergency measures and focus the attention of different disciplines on a common target. This would allow capitalizing on synergies between different disciplines and boosting the development of multihazard early warning systems. This review discusses the state of the art in impact forecasting for a wide range of natural hazards. We outline the added value of impact-based warnings compared to hazard forecasting for the emergency phase, indicate challenges and pitfalls, and synthesize the review results across hazard types most relevant for Europe.
{"title":"Impact Forecasting to Support Emergency Management of Natural Hazards","authors":"Bruno Merz, Christian Kuhlicke, Michael Kunz, Massimiliano Pittore, Andrey Babeyko, David N. Bresch, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Frauke Feser, Inga Koszalka, Heidi Kreibich, Florian Pantillon, Stefano Parolai, Joaquim G. Pinto, Heinz Jürgen Punge, Eleonora Rivalta, Kai Schr?ter, Karen Strehlow, Ralf Weisse, Andreas Wurpts","doi":"10.1029/2020RG000704","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2020RG000704","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Forecasting and early warning systems are important investments to protect lives, properties, and livelihood. While early warning systems are frequently used to predict the magnitude, location, and timing of potentially damaging events, these systems rarely provide impact estimates, such as the expected amount and distribution of physical damage, human consequences, disruption of services, or financial loss. Complementing early warning systems with impact forecasts has a twofold advantage: It would provide decision makers with richer information to take informed decisions about emergency measures and focus the attention of different disciplines on a common target. This would allow capitalizing on synergies between different disciplines and boosting the development of multihazard early warning systems. This review discusses the state of the art in impact forecasting for a wide range of natural hazards. We outline the added value of impact-based warnings compared to hazard forecasting for the emergency phase, indicate challenges and pitfalls, and synthesize the review results across hazard types most relevant for Europe.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2020RG000704","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"5785271","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
T. L. Noble, E. J. Rohling, A. R. A. Aitken, H. C. Bostock, Z. Chase, N. Gomez, L. M. Jong, M. A. King, A. N. Mackintosh, F. S. McCormack, R. M. McKay, L. Menviel, S. J. Phipps, M. E. Weber, C. J. Fogwill, B. Gayen, N. R. Golledge, D. E. Gwyther, A. McC. Hogg, Y. M. Martos, B. Pena-Molino, J. Roberts, T. van de Flierdt, T. Williams
The Antarctic Ice Sheet (AIS) is out of equilibrium with the current anthropogenic-enhanced climate forcing. Paleoenvironmental records and ice sheet models reveal that the AIS has been tightly coupled to the climate system during the past and indicate the potential for accelerated and sustained Antarctic ice mass loss into the future. Modern observations by contrast suggest that the AIS has only just started to respond to climate change in recent decades. The maximum projected sea level contribution from Antarctica to 2100 has increased significantly since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 5th Assessment Report, although estimates continue to evolve with new observational and theoretical advances. This review brings together recent literature highlighting the progress made on the known processes and feedbacks that influence the stability of the AIS. Reducing the uncertainty in the magnitude and timing of the future sea level response to AIS change requires a multidisciplinary approach that integrates knowledge of the interactions between the ice sheet, solid Earth, atmosphere, and ocean systems and across time scales of days to millennia. We start by reviewing the processes affecting AIS mass change, from atmospheric and oceanic processes acting on short time scales (days to decades), through to ice processes acting on intermediate time scales (decades to centuries) and the response to solid Earth interactions over longer time scales (decades to millennia). We then review the evidence of AIS changes from the Pliocene to the present and consider the projections of global sea level rise and their consequences. We highlight priority research areas required to improve our understanding of the processes and feedbacks governing AIS change.
{"title":"The Sensitivity of the Antarctic Ice Sheet to a Changing Climate: Past, Present, and Future","authors":"T. L. Noble, E. J. Rohling, A. R. A. Aitken, H. C. Bostock, Z. Chase, N. Gomez, L. M. Jong, M. A. King, A. N. Mackintosh, F. S. McCormack, R. M. McKay, L. Menviel, S. J. Phipps, M. E. Weber, C. J. Fogwill, B. Gayen, N. R. Golledge, D. E. Gwyther, A. McC. Hogg, Y. M. Martos, B. Pena-Molino, J. Roberts, T. van de Flierdt, T. Williams","doi":"10.1029/2019RG000663","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000663","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Antarctic Ice Sheet (AIS) is out of equilibrium with the current anthropogenic-enhanced climate forcing. Paleoenvironmental records and ice sheet models reveal that the AIS has been tightly coupled to the climate system during the past and indicate the potential for accelerated and sustained Antarctic ice mass loss into the future. Modern observations by contrast suggest that the AIS has only just started to respond to climate change in recent decades. The maximum projected sea level contribution from Antarctica to 2100 has increased significantly since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 5th Assessment Report, although estimates continue to evolve with new observational and theoretical advances. This review brings together recent literature highlighting the progress made on the known processes and feedbacks that influence the stability of the AIS. Reducing the uncertainty in the magnitude and timing of the future sea level response to AIS change requires a multidisciplinary approach that integrates knowledge of the interactions between the ice sheet, solid Earth, atmosphere, and ocean systems and across time scales of days to millennia. We start by reviewing the processes affecting AIS mass change, from atmospheric and oceanic processes acting on short time scales (days to decades), through to ice processes acting on intermediate time scales (decades to centuries) and the response to solid Earth interactions over longer time scales (decades to millennia). We then review the evidence of AIS changes from the Pliocene to the present and consider the projections of global sea level rise and their consequences. We highlight priority research areas required to improve our understanding of the processes and feedbacks governing AIS change.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2019RG000663","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"5696080","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
S. C. Sherwood, M. J. Webb, J. D. Annan, K. C. Armour, P. M. Forster, J. C. Hargreaves, G. Hegerl, S. A. Klein, K. D. Marvel, E. J. Rohling, M. Watanabe, T. Andrews, P. Braconnot, C. S. Bretherton, G. L. Foster, Z. Hausfather, A. S. von der Heydt, R. Knutti, T. Mauritsen, J. R. Norris, C. Proistosescu, M. Rugenstein, G. A. Schmidt, K. B. Tokarska, M. D. Zelinka
We assess evidence relevant to Earth's equilibrium climate sensitivity per doubling of atmospheric CO2, characterized by an effective sensitivity S. This evidence includes feedback process understanding, the historical climate record, and the paleoclimate record. An S value lower than 2 K is difficult to reconcile with any of the three lines of evidence. The amount of cooling during the Last Glacial Maximum provides strong evidence against values of S greater than 4.5 K. Other lines of evidence in combination also show that this is relatively unlikely. We use a Bayesian approach to produce a probability density function (PDF) for S given all the evidence, including tests of robustness to difficult-to-quantify uncertainties and different priors. The 66% range is 2.6–3.9 K for our Baseline calculation and remains within 2.3–4.5 K under the robustness tests; corresponding 5–95% ranges are 2.3–4.7 K, bounded by 2.0–5.7 K (although such high-confidence ranges should be regarded more cautiously). This indicates a stronger constraint on S than reported in past assessments, by lifting the low end of the range. This narrowing occurs because the three lines of evidence agree and are judged to be largely independent and because of greater confidence in understanding feedback processes and in combining evidence. We identify promising avenues for further narrowing the range in S, in particular using comprehensive models and process understanding to address limitations in the traditional forcing-feedback paradigm for interpreting past changes.
{"title":"An Assessment of Earth's Climate Sensitivity Using Multiple Lines of Evidence","authors":"S. C. Sherwood, M. J. Webb, J. D. Annan, K. C. Armour, P. M. Forster, J. C. Hargreaves, G. Hegerl, S. A. Klein, K. D. Marvel, E. J. Rohling, M. Watanabe, T. Andrews, P. Braconnot, C. S. Bretherton, G. L. Foster, Z. Hausfather, A. S. von der Heydt, R. Knutti, T. Mauritsen, J. R. Norris, C. Proistosescu, M. Rugenstein, G. A. Schmidt, K. B. Tokarska, M. D. Zelinka","doi":"10.1029/2019RG000678","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000678","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We assess evidence relevant to Earth's equilibrium climate sensitivity per doubling of atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>, characterized by an effective sensitivity <i>S</i>. This evidence includes feedback process understanding, the historical climate record, and the paleoclimate record. An <i>S</i> value lower than 2 K is difficult to reconcile with any of the three lines of evidence. The amount of cooling during the Last Glacial Maximum provides strong evidence against values of <i>S</i> greater than 4.5 K. Other lines of evidence in combination also show that this is relatively unlikely. We use a Bayesian approach to produce a probability density function (PDF) for <i>S</i> given all the evidence, including tests of robustness to difficult-to-quantify uncertainties and different priors. The 66% range is 2.6–3.9 K for our Baseline calculation and remains within 2.3–4.5 K under the robustness tests; corresponding 5–95% ranges are 2.3–4.7 K, bounded by 2.0–5.7 K (although such high-confidence ranges should be regarded more cautiously). This indicates a stronger constraint on <i>S</i> than reported in past assessments, by lifting the low end of the range. This narrowing occurs because the three lines of evidence agree and are judged to be largely independent and because of greater confidence in understanding feedback processes and in combining evidence. We identify promising avenues for further narrowing the range in <i>S</i>, in particular using comprehensive models and process understanding to address limitations in the traditional forcing-feedback paradigm for interpreting past changes.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2019RG000678","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"5981783","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Michel C. Boufadel, Scott Socolofsky, Joseph Katz, Di Yang, Cosan Daskiran, William Dewar
Jets and plumes have been the focus of quantitative investigations since the mid-1950s. These investigations intensified following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, in which thousands of tons of oil and natural gas were released into the Gulf of Mexico. This review focuses on plume dynamics that apply to both single-phase and multiphase liquid-in-liquid and liquid plus gas into liquid plumes, including bubble and droplet formation, and heat and mass transfer. Broadly, our work highlights several previously unknown or overlooked aspects of multiphase flow in the deep oceans. Upstream of the jet release, multiphase hydraulics can significantly affect the turbulence, for instance, through churn flow that enhances the turbulence in the free jet, affecting the conditions where bubbles and droplets are formed. Droplet formation was a major focus recently, with experiments covering a range of scales and flow rates of oil and gas at low and high pressure. Detailed observations of droplet formation at the jet-water boundary reveal the formation of compound droplets, which are emulsions of oil and water with implications for mass conservation and mass transfer. At the plume scale, integral models have been adapted to include the complex thermodynamics and chemistry of oil and gas plumes. In parallel, significant advances were made in numerical simulations of multiphase plumes through large eddy simulations by treating the oil and gas either a continuous or discrete phase. Through this work, a vivid picture of the complex droplet, chemical, and hydrodynamic behavior of multiphase plumes in the ocean is emerging.
{"title":"A Review on Multiphase Underwater Jets and Plumes: Droplets, Hydrodynamics, and Chemistry","authors":"Michel C. Boufadel, Scott Socolofsky, Joseph Katz, Di Yang, Cosan Daskiran, William Dewar","doi":"10.1029/2020RG000703","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2020RG000703","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Jets and plumes have been the focus of quantitative investigations since the mid-1950s. These investigations intensified following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, in which thousands of tons of oil and natural gas were released into the Gulf of Mexico. This review focuses on plume dynamics that apply to both single-phase and multiphase liquid-in-liquid and liquid plus gas into liquid plumes, including bubble and droplet formation, and heat and mass transfer. Broadly, our work highlights several previously unknown or overlooked aspects of multiphase flow in the deep oceans. Upstream of the jet release, multiphase hydraulics can significantly affect the turbulence, for instance, through churn flow that enhances the turbulence in the free jet, affecting the conditions where bubbles and droplets are formed. Droplet formation was a major focus recently, with experiments covering a range of scales and flow rates of oil and gas at low and high pressure. Detailed observations of droplet formation at the jet-water boundary reveal the formation of compound droplets, which are emulsions of oil and water with implications for mass conservation and mass transfer. At the plume scale, integral models have been adapted to include the complex thermodynamics and chemistry of oil and gas plumes. In parallel, significant advances were made in numerical simulations of multiphase plumes through large eddy simulations by treating the oil and gas either a continuous or discrete phase. Through this work, a vivid picture of the complex droplet, chemical, and hydrodynamic behavior of multiphase plumes in the ocean is emerging.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2020RG000703","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"5719706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
?. Hodnebrog, B. Aamaas, J. S. Fuglestvedt, G. Marston, G. Myhre, C. J. Nielsen, M. Sandstad, K. P. Shine, T. J. Wallington
Human activity has led to increased atmospheric concentrations of many gases, including halocarbons, and may lead to emissions of many more gases. Many of these gases are, on a per molecule basis, powerful greenhouse gases, although at present-day concentrations their climate effect is in the so-called weak limit (i.e., their effect scales linearly with concentration). We published a comprehensive review of the radiative efficiencies (RE) and global warming potentials (GWP) for around 200 such compounds in 2013 (Hodnebrog et al., 2013, https://doi.org/10.1002/rog.20013). Here we present updated RE and GWP values for compounds where experimental infrared absorption spectra are available. Updated numbers are based on a revised “Pinnock curve”, which gives RE as a function of wave number, and now also accounts for stratospheric temperature adjustment (Shine & Myhre, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001951). Further updates include the implementation of around 500 absorption spectra additional to those in the 2013 review and new atmospheric lifetimes from the literature (mainly from WMO (2019)). In total, values for 60 of the compounds previously assessed are based on additional absorption spectra, and 42 compounds have REs which differ by >10% from our previous assessment. New RE calculations are presented for more than 400 compounds in addition to the previously assessed compounds, and GWP calculations are presented for a total of around 250 compounds. Present-day radiative forcing due to halocarbons and other weak absorbers is 0.38 [0.33–0.43] W m−2, compared to 0.36 [0.32–0.40] W m−2 in IPCC AR5 (Myhre et al., 2013, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.018), which is about 18% of the current CO2 forcing.
{"title":"Updated Global Warming Potentials and Radiative Efficiencies of Halocarbons and Other Weak Atmospheric Absorbers","authors":"?. Hodnebrog, B. Aamaas, J. S. Fuglestvedt, G. Marston, G. Myhre, C. J. Nielsen, M. Sandstad, K. P. Shine, T. J. Wallington","doi":"10.1029/2019RG000691","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000691","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Human activity has led to increased atmospheric concentrations of many gases, including halocarbons, and may lead to emissions of many more gases. Many of these gases are, on a per molecule basis, powerful greenhouse gases, although at present-day concentrations their climate effect is in the so-called weak limit (i.e., their effect scales linearly with concentration). We published a comprehensive review of the radiative efficiencies (RE) and global warming potentials (GWP) for around 200 such compounds in 2013 (Hodnebrog et al., 2013, https://doi.org/10.1002/rog.20013). Here we present updated RE and GWP values for compounds where experimental infrared absorption spectra are available. Updated numbers are based on a revised “Pinnock curve”, which gives RE as a function of wave number, and now also accounts for stratospheric temperature adjustment (Shine & Myhre, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001951). Further updates include the implementation of around 500 absorption spectra additional to those in the 2013 review and new atmospheric lifetimes from the literature (mainly from WMO (2019)). In total, values for 60 of the compounds previously assessed are based on additional absorption spectra, and 42 compounds have REs which differ by >10% from our previous assessment. New RE calculations are presented for more than 400 compounds in addition to the previously assessed compounds, and GWP calculations are presented for a total of around 250 compounds. Present-day radiative forcing due to halocarbons and other weak absorbers is 0.38 [0.33–0.43] W m<sup>−2</sup>, compared to 0.36 [0.32–0.40] W m<sup>−2</sup> in IPCC AR5 (Myhre et al., 2013, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.018), which is about 18% of the current CO<sub>2</sub> forcing.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2019RG000691","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6168121","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ryan Schultz, Robert J. Skoumal, Michael R. Brudzinski, Dave Eaton, Brian Baptie, William Ellsworth
Hydraulic fracturing (HF) is a technique that is used for extracting petroleum resources from impermeable host rocks. In this process, fluid injected under high pressure causes fractures to propagate. This technique has been transformative for the hydrocarbon industry, unlocking otherwise stranded resources; however, environmental concerns make HF controversial. One concern is HF-induced seismicity, since fluids driven under high pressure also have the potential to reactivate faults. Controversy has inevitably followed these HF-induced earthquakes, with economic and human losses from ground shaking at one extreme and moratoriums on resource development at the other. Here, we review the state of knowledge of this category of induced seismicity. We first cover essential background information on HF along with an overview of published induced earthquake cases to date. Expanding on this, we synthesize the common themes and interpret the origin of these commonalities, which include recurrent earthquake swarms, proximity to well bore, rapid response to stimulation, and a paucity of reported cases. Next, we discuss the unanswered questions that naturally arise from these commonalities, leading to potential research themes: consistent recognition of cases, proposed triggering mechanisms, geologically susceptible conditions, identification of operational controls, effective mitigation efforts, and science-informed regulatory management. HF-induced seismicity provides a unique opportunity to better understand and manage earthquake rupture processes; overall, understanding HF-induced earthquakes is important in order to avoid extreme reactions in either direction.
{"title":"Hydraulic Fracturing-Induced Seismicity","authors":"Ryan Schultz, Robert J. Skoumal, Michael R. Brudzinski, Dave Eaton, Brian Baptie, William Ellsworth","doi":"10.1029/2019RG000695","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000695","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Hydraulic fracturing (HF) is a technique that is used for extracting petroleum resources from impermeable host rocks. In this process, fluid injected under high pressure causes fractures to propagate. This technique has been transformative for the hydrocarbon industry, unlocking otherwise stranded resources; however, environmental concerns make HF controversial. One concern is HF-induced seismicity, since fluids driven under high pressure also have the potential to reactivate faults. Controversy has inevitably followed these HF-induced earthquakes, with economic and human losses from ground shaking at one extreme and moratoriums on resource development at the other. Here, we review the state of knowledge of this category of induced seismicity. We first cover essential background information on HF along with an overview of published induced earthquake cases to date. Expanding on this, we synthesize the common themes and interpret the origin of these commonalities, which include recurrent earthquake swarms, proximity to well bore, rapid response to stimulation, and a paucity of reported cases. Next, we discuss the unanswered questions that naturally arise from these commonalities, leading to potential research themes: consistent recognition of cases, proposed triggering mechanisms, geologically susceptible conditions, identification of operational controls, effective mitigation efforts, and science-informed regulatory management. HF-induced seismicity provides a unique opportunity to better understand and manage earthquake rupture processes; overall, understanding HF-induced earthquakes is important in order to avoid extreme reactions in either direction.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2019RG000695","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6225937","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Alessandro Battaglia, Pavlos Kollias, Ranvir Dhillon, Richard Roy, Simone Tanelli, Katia Lamer, Mircea Grecu, Matthew Lebsock, Daniel Watters, Kamil Mroz, Gerald Heymsfield, Lihua Li, Kinji Furukawa
Spaceborne radars offer a unique three-dimensional view of the atmospheric components of the Earth's hydrological cycle. Existing and planned spaceborne radar missions provide cloud and precipitation information over the oceans and land difficult to access in remote areas. A careful look into their measurement capabilities indicates considerable gaps that hinder our ability to detect and probe key cloud and precipitation processes. The international community is currently debating how the next generation of spaceborne radars shall enhance current capabilities and address remaining gaps. Part of the discussion is focused on how to best take advantage of recent advancements in radar and space platform technologies while addressing outstanding limitations. First, the observing capabilities and measurement highlights of existing and planned spaceborne radar missions including TRMM, CloudSat, GPM, RainCube, and EarthCARE are reviewed. Then, the limitations of current spaceborne observing systems, with respect to observations of low-level clouds, midlatitude and high-latitude precipitation, and convective motions, are thoroughly analyzed. Finally, the review proposes potential solutions and future research avenues to be explored. Promising paths forward include collecting observations across a gamut of frequency bands tailored to specific scientific objectives, collecting observations using mixtures of pulse lengths to overcome trade-offs in sensitivity and resolution, and flying constellations of miniaturized radars to capture rapidly evolving weather phenomena. This work aims to increase the awareness about existing limitations and gaps in spaceborne radar measurements and to increase the level of engagement of the international community in the discussions for the next generation of spaceborne radar systems.
{"title":"Spaceborne Cloud and Precipitation Radars: Status, Challenges, and Ways Forward","authors":"Alessandro Battaglia, Pavlos Kollias, Ranvir Dhillon, Richard Roy, Simone Tanelli, Katia Lamer, Mircea Grecu, Matthew Lebsock, Daniel Watters, Kamil Mroz, Gerald Heymsfield, Lihua Li, Kinji Furukawa","doi":"10.1029/2019RG000686","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000686","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Spaceborne radars offer a unique three-dimensional view of the atmospheric components of the Earth's hydrological cycle. Existing and planned spaceborne radar missions provide cloud and precipitation information over the oceans and land difficult to access in remote areas. A careful look into their measurement capabilities indicates considerable gaps that hinder our ability to detect and probe key cloud and precipitation processes. The international community is currently debating how the next generation of spaceborne radars shall enhance current capabilities and address remaining gaps. Part of the discussion is focused on how to best take advantage of recent advancements in radar and space platform technologies while addressing outstanding limitations. First, the observing capabilities and measurement highlights of existing and planned spaceborne radar missions including TRMM, CloudSat, GPM, RainCube, and EarthCARE are reviewed. Then, the limitations of current spaceborne observing systems, with respect to observations of low-level clouds, midlatitude and high-latitude precipitation, and convective motions, are thoroughly analyzed. Finally, the review proposes potential solutions and future research avenues to be explored. Promising paths forward include collecting observations across a gamut of frequency bands tailored to specific scientific objectives, collecting observations using mixtures of pulse lengths to overcome trade-offs in sensitivity and resolution, and flying constellations of miniaturized radars to capture rapidly evolving weather phenomena. This work aims to increase the awareness about existing limitations and gaps in spaceborne radar measurements and to increase the level of engagement of the international community in the discussions for the next generation of spaceborne radar systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2019RG000686","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6227511","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jack J. Middelburg, Karline Soetaert, Mathilde Hagens
Alkalinity, the excess of proton acceptors over donors, plays a major role in ocean chemistry, in buffering and in calcium carbonate precipitation and dissolution. Understanding alkalinity dynamics is pivotal to quantify ocean carbon dioxide uptake during times of global change. Here we review ocean alkalinity and its role in ocean buffering as well as the biogeochemical processes governing alkalinity and pH in the ocean. We show that it is important to distinguish between measurable titration alkalinity and charge balance alkalinity that is used to quantify calcification and carbonate dissolution and needed to understand the impact of biogeochemical processes on components of the carbon dioxide system. A general treatment of ocean buffering and quantification via sensitivity factors is presented and used to link existing buffer and sensitivity factors. The impact of individual biogeochemical processes on ocean alkalinity and pH is discussed and quantified using these sensitivity factors. Processes governing ocean alkalinity on longer time scales such as carbonate compensation, (reversed) silicate weathering, and anaerobic mineralization are discussed and used to derive a close-to-balance ocean alkalinity budget for the modern ocean.
{"title":"Ocean Alkalinity, Buffering and Biogeochemical Processes","authors":"Jack J. Middelburg, Karline Soetaert, Mathilde Hagens","doi":"10.1029/2019RG000681","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000681","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Alkalinity, the excess of proton acceptors over donors, plays a major role in ocean chemistry, in buffering and in calcium carbonate precipitation and dissolution. Understanding alkalinity dynamics is pivotal to quantify ocean carbon dioxide uptake during times of global change. Here we review ocean alkalinity and its role in ocean buffering as well as the biogeochemical processes governing alkalinity and pH in the ocean. We show that it is important to distinguish between measurable titration alkalinity and charge balance alkalinity that is used to quantify calcification and carbonate dissolution and needed to understand the impact of biogeochemical processes on components of the carbon dioxide system. A general treatment of ocean buffering and quantification via sensitivity factors is presented and used to link existing buffer and sensitivity factors. The impact of individual biogeochemical processes on ocean alkalinity and pH is discussed and quantified using these sensitivity factors. Processes governing ocean alkalinity on longer time scales such as carbonate compensation, (reversed) silicate weathering, and anaerobic mineralization are discussed and used to derive a close-to-balance ocean alkalinity budget for the modern ocean.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2019RG000681","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"6169207","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
C. Zhang, á. F. Adames, B. Khouider, B. Wang, D. Yang
Studies of the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO) have progressed considerably during the past decades in observations, numerical modeling, and theoretical understanding. Many theoretical attempts have been made to identify the most essential processes responsible for the existence of the MJO. Criteria are proposed to separate a hypothesis from a theory (based on the first principles with quantitative and testable assumptions, able to predict quantitatively the fundamental scales and eastward propagation of the MJO). Four MJO theories are selected to be summarized and compared in this article: the skeleton theory, moisture-mode theory, gravity-wave theory, and trio-interaction theory of the MJO. These four MJO theories are distinct from each other in their key assumptions, parameterized processes, and, particularly, selection mechanisms for the zonal spatial scale, time scale, and eastward propagation of the MJO. The comparison of the four theories and more recent development in MJO dynamical approaches lead to a realization that theoretical thinking of the MJO is diverse and understanding of MJO dynamics needs to be further advanced.
{"title":"Four Theories of the Madden-Julian Oscillation","authors":"C. Zhang, á. F. Adames, B. Khouider, B. Wang, D. Yang","doi":"10.1029/2019RG000685","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000685","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Studies of the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO) have progressed considerably during the past decades in observations, numerical modeling, and theoretical understanding. Many theoretical attempts have been made to identify the most essential processes responsible for the existence of the MJO. Criteria are proposed to separate a hypothesis from a theory (based on the first principles with quantitative and testable assumptions, able to predict quantitatively the fundamental scales and eastward propagation of the MJO). Four MJO theories are selected to be summarized and compared in this article: the skeleton theory, moisture-mode theory, gravity-wave theory, and trio-interaction theory of the MJO. These four MJO theories are distinct from each other in their key assumptions, parameterized processes, and, particularly, selection mechanisms for the zonal spatial scale, time scale, and eastward propagation of the MJO. The comparison of the four theories and more recent development in MJO dynamical approaches lead to a realization that theoretical thinking of the MJO is diverse and understanding of MJO dynamics needs to be further advanced.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2019RG000685","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"5906363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Benjamin D. Hamlington, Alex S. Gardner, Erik Ivins, Jan T. M. Lenaerts, J. T. Reager, David S. Trossman, Edward D. Zaron, Surendra Adhikari, Anthony Arendt, Andy Aschwanden, Brian D. Beckley, David P. S. Bekaert, Geoffrey Blewitt, Lambert Caron, Don P. Chambers, Hrishikesh A. Chandanpurkar, Knut Christianson, Beata Csatho, Richard I. Cullather, Robert M. DeConto, John T. Fasullo, Thomas Frederikse, Jeffrey T. Freymueller, Daniel M. Gilford, Manuela Girotto, William C. Hammond, Regine Hock, Nicholas Holschuh, Robert E. Kopp, Felix Landerer, Eric Larour, Dimitris Menemenlis, Mark Merrifield, Jerry X. Mitrovica, R. Steven Nerem, Isabel J. Nias, Veronica Nieves, Sophie Nowicki, Kishore Pangaluru, Christopher G. Piecuch, Richard D. Ray, David R. Rounce, Nicole-Jeanne Schlegel, Hélène Seroussi, Manoochehr Shirzaei, William V. Sweet, Isabella Velicogna, Nadya Vinogradova, Thomas Wahl, David N. Wiese, Michael J. Willis
Global sea level provides an important indicator of the state of the warming climate, but changes in regional sea level are most relevant for coastal communities around the world. With improvements to the sea-level observing system, the knowledge of regional sea-level change has advanced dramatically in recent years. Satellite measurements coupled with in situ observations have allowed for comprehensive study and improved understanding of the diverse set of drivers that lead to variations in sea level in space and time. Despite the advances, gaps in the understanding of contemporary sea-level change remain and inhibit the ability to predict how the relevant processes may lead to future change. These gaps arise in part due to the complexity of the linkages between the drivers of sea-level change. Here we review the individual processes which lead to sea-level change and then describe how they combine and vary regionally. The intent of the paper is to provide an overview of the current state of understanding of the processes that cause regional sea-level change and to identify and discuss limitations and uncertainty in our understanding of these processes. Areas where the lack of understanding or gaps in knowledge inhibit the ability to provide the needed information for comprehensive planning efforts are of particular focus. Finally, a goal of this paper is to highlight the role of the expanded sea-level observation network—particularly as related to satellite observations—in the improved scientific understanding of the contributors to regional sea-level change.
{"title":"Understanding of Contemporary Regional Sea-Level Change and the Implications for the Future","authors":"Benjamin D. Hamlington, Alex S. Gardner, Erik Ivins, Jan T. M. Lenaerts, J. T. Reager, David S. Trossman, Edward D. Zaron, Surendra Adhikari, Anthony Arendt, Andy Aschwanden, Brian D. Beckley, David P. S. Bekaert, Geoffrey Blewitt, Lambert Caron, Don P. Chambers, Hrishikesh A. Chandanpurkar, Knut Christianson, Beata Csatho, Richard I. Cullather, Robert M. DeConto, John T. Fasullo, Thomas Frederikse, Jeffrey T. Freymueller, Daniel M. Gilford, Manuela Girotto, William C. Hammond, Regine Hock, Nicholas Holschuh, Robert E. Kopp, Felix Landerer, Eric Larour, Dimitris Menemenlis, Mark Merrifield, Jerry X. Mitrovica, R. Steven Nerem, Isabel J. Nias, Veronica Nieves, Sophie Nowicki, Kishore Pangaluru, Christopher G. Piecuch, Richard D. Ray, David R. Rounce, Nicole-Jeanne Schlegel, Hélène Seroussi, Manoochehr Shirzaei, William V. Sweet, Isabella Velicogna, Nadya Vinogradova, Thomas Wahl, David N. Wiese, Michael J. Willis","doi":"10.1029/2019RG000672","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000672","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Global sea level provides an important indicator of the state of the warming climate, but changes in regional sea level are most relevant for coastal communities around the world. With improvements to the sea-level observing system, the knowledge of regional sea-level change has advanced dramatically in recent years. Satellite measurements coupled with in situ observations have allowed for comprehensive study and improved understanding of the diverse set of drivers that lead to variations in sea level in space and time. Despite the advances, gaps in the understanding of contemporary sea-level change remain and inhibit the ability to predict how the relevant processes may lead to future change. These gaps arise in part due to the complexity of the linkages between the drivers of sea-level change. Here we review the individual processes which lead to sea-level change and then describe how they combine and vary regionally. The intent of the paper is to provide an overview of the current state of understanding of the processes that cause regional sea-level change and to identify and discuss limitations and uncertainty in our understanding of these processes. Areas where the lack of understanding or gaps in knowledge inhibit the ability to provide the needed information for comprehensive planning efforts are of particular focus. Finally, a goal of this paper is to highlight the role of the expanded sea-level observation network—particularly as related to satellite observations—in the improved scientific understanding of the contributors to regional sea-level change.</p>","PeriodicalId":21177,"journal":{"name":"Reviews of Geophysics","volume":"58 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.2,"publicationDate":"2020-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1029/2019RG000672","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"5666218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}