Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based Observations

In many hydrological models, the amount of evapotranspired water is calculated using the potential evapotranspiration (PET) approach. The main driver of several PET approaches is net radiation, whose downward components are usually obtained from meteorological input data, whereas the upward componen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Müller Schmied, Hannes, Müller, Richard, Sánchez-Lorenzo, Arturo, Ahrens, Bodo, Wild, Martin
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2016
País:España
Institución:Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
Repositorio:DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC
OAI Identifier:oai:digital.csic.es:10261/142111
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10261/142111
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:ddc:550
id ES_c2ded2be6d487f3db7af5323da4a9bea
oai_identifier_str oai:digital.csic.es:10261/142111
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based ObservationsMüller Schmied, HannesMüller, RichardSánchez-Lorenzo, ArturoAhrens, BodoWild, Martinddc:550In many hydrological models, the amount of evapotranspired water is calculated using the potential evapotranspiration (PET) approach. The main driver of several PET approaches is net radiation, whose downward components are usually obtained from meteorological input data, whereas the upward components are calculated by the model itself. Thus, uncertainties can be large due to both the input data and model assumptions. In this study, we compare the radiation components of the WaterGAP Global Hydrology Model, driven by two meteorological input datasets and two radiation setups from ERA-Interim reanalysis. We assess the performance with respect to monthly observations provided by the Baseline Surface Radiation Network (BSRN) and the Global Energy Balance Archive (GEBA). The assessment is done for the global land area and specifically for energy/water limited regions. The results indicate that there is no optimal radiation input throughout the model variants, but standard meteorological input datasets perform better than those directly obtained by ERA-Interim reanalysis for the key variable net radiation. The low number of observations for some radiation components, as well as the scale mismatch between station observations and 0.5° × 0.5° grid cell size, limits the assessment.We thank Petra Döll for initial discussions according to the study design and Melanie Seeger (Möller before marriage) for her input regarding the efficiency criteria. We greatly appreciate the suggestions of three anonymous reviewers that helped to improve the manuscript significantly. We acknowledge support by the CSIC Open Access Publication Initiative through its Unit of Information Resources for Research (URICI).Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing InstituteConsejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (España)2017201720162017info:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501http://hdl.handle.net/10261/142111reponame:DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSICinstname:Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)Inglésinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:digital.csic.es:10261/1421112026-05-22T06:33:51Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based Observations
title Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based Observations
spellingShingle Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based Observations
Müller Schmied, Hannes
ddc:550
title_short Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based Observations
title_full Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based Observations
title_fullStr Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based Observations
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based Observations
title_sort Evaluation of Radiation Components in a Global Freshwater Model with Station-Based Observations
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Müller Schmied, Hannes
Müller, Richard
Sánchez-Lorenzo, Arturo
Ahrens, Bodo
Wild, Martin
author Müller Schmied, Hannes
author_facet Müller Schmied, Hannes
Müller, Richard
Sánchez-Lorenzo, Arturo
Ahrens, Bodo
Wild, Martin
author_role author
author2 Müller, Richard
Sánchez-Lorenzo, Arturo
Ahrens, Bodo
Wild, Martin
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (España)
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv ddc:550
topic ddc:550
description In many hydrological models, the amount of evapotranspired water is calculated using the potential evapotranspiration (PET) approach. The main driver of several PET approaches is net radiation, whose downward components are usually obtained from meteorological input data, whereas the upward components are calculated by the model itself. Thus, uncertainties can be large due to both the input data and model assumptions. In this study, we compare the radiation components of the WaterGAP Global Hydrology Model, driven by two meteorological input datasets and two radiation setups from ERA-Interim reanalysis. We assess the performance with respect to monthly observations provided by the Baseline Surface Radiation Network (BSRN) and the Global Energy Balance Archive (GEBA). The assessment is done for the global land area and specifically for energy/water limited regions. The results indicate that there is no optimal radiation input throughout the model variants, but standard meteorological input datasets perform better than those directly obtained by ERA-Interim reanalysis for the key variable net radiation. The low number of observations for some radiation components, as well as the scale mismatch between station observations and 0.5° × 0.5° grid cell size, limits the assessment.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016
2017
2017
2017
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
format article
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10261/142111
url http://hdl.handle.net/10261/142111
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC
instname:Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
instname_str Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
reponame_str DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC
collection DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869418724822351872
score 15,812429

Similares en LA Referencia