Jump to: Page Content, Section Navigation, Site Navigation, Site Search, Account Information, or Site Tools.
|
|
Technical Comments
|
| 1. |
B. A. Wielicki,
et al.,
Science
295,
841
(2002)
|
| 2. |
J. Chen,
B. E. Carlson,
A. D. Del
Genio,
Science
295,
838
(2002)
|
| 3. | IPCC, Climate Change 2001, The Scientific Basis, J. T. Houghton et al., Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2001), p. 881. |
| 4. | L. E. Lucas, et al., J. Clim. 14, 2583 (2001) [CrossRef]. |
| 5. | K. E. Trenberth, D. P. Stepaniak, J. M. Caron, J. Geophys. Res. 107, 10.1029/2000JD000297 (2002). |
| 6. | R. D. Cess, et al., Geophys. Res. Lett. 28, 4547 (2001) [CrossRef]. |
| 7. | The offset was based upon calibration against the blackbody
on board the satellite (14). Observations of the total solar
irradiance from the same satellite also changed by about 1 W
m 2 relative to other measurements about this time. |
| 8. | K. E. Trenberth, D. P. Stepaniak, J. M. Caron, J. Clim. 13, 3969 (2000) [CrossRef]. |
| 9. | The poleward edges of the upward branch of the Hadley circulation migrate from 20°S to 20°N with the seasons and were not accurately depicted in (2). |
| 10. | The reanalyses are from National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP)/National Center for Atmospheric Research and European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF). For NCEP, they are extended using the same analysis system. Anomalies are defined as departures from the mean annual cycle. The monthly anomaly time series has been smoothed with a 1/24 (1-3-5-6-5-3-1) filter that suppresses subannual fluctuations but shows interannual variability. For the 1979 to 1993 period, the monthly anomalies from NCEP are correlated with values from ECMWF about 0.6 from 20°N to 20°S and exceed 0.9 in the extratropics. |
| 11. | K. E. Trenberth and T. J. Hoar, Geophys. Res. Lett. 23, 57 (1996) [CrossRef]. |
| 12. | K. E. Trenberth, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 78, 2771 (1997) [CrossRef]. |
| 13. | The El Niño from 1990 to 1995 could also be interpreted as a series of three El Niños in close succession. |
| 14. | B. A. Wielicki, personal communication. |
Response: We have carefully considered Trenberth's concerns regarding our papers (1, 2) and have reached the following conclusions.
First, Trenberth is concerned that there was an ERBS calibration shift
while the instrument was powered down for 4 months from July to
November 1993, during a spacecraft battery system anomaly. When the
instrument resumed operation, the total channel offsets (zero-level
instrument reading) used to provide longwave (LW) fluxes had dropped by
about 3 W m
2, roughly the magnitude of the decadal
tropical mean increase in LW flux. It is to be expected from both the
physics of active-cavity instruments and past experience that changes
in offsets will occur after extended power-down periods because of the
change in thermal state of the instrument (3, 4).
The validity of the ERBS offset change in late 1993 was verified using
two independent tests. Offsets determined using the onboard blackbody were verified by direct observations of deep space four times between
1984 and 1999. All four cases agreed with blackbody-determined offsets
to within 0.3 to 0.7 W m
2, while pre- and post-1993
values agreed within 0.5 W m
2. In addition, 6-month
averages of Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR),
High-Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder (HIRS), and ERBS LW fluxes
before and after the period in question agreed to within 0.5 W
m
2. For a 6-month period, AVHRR and HIRS orbit and
calibration drift are expected to be small. We conclude that there is
no evidence that a change in the ERBS calibration after the 4-month
shutdown explains the decadal variations. We also note that both HIRS
and AVHRR are only indirect measures of broadband LW flux.
Second, Trenberth suggests that the 36-day period required for the ERBS orbit to precess through 12 hours of local time sampling could alias diurnal cycle sampling errors into an apparent semiannual cycle change in shortwave (SW) flux. We tested this by constructing 36-day averages instead of monthly means, and found that Trenberth is correct: this removed roughly two-thirds of the semiannual signal. The reason for this error was an interaction between the monthly data processing and a slow drift in the phase of the precession by 6 hours over the period from 1985 to 1995. The 36-day average ERBS anomaly records are shown in Figs. 1 and 2, which should be compared with figures 3 and 4 of (1). The decadal variation in SW flux is now clearer, without a strong seasonal component. Some evidence for increased SW and net flux variability in the 1990s remains.
Fig. 1.
ERBS satellite 36-day precession cycle averages are
used to replace traditional monthly means. These results for tropical
mean (20°S to 20°N) solar reflected fluxes (SW in blue) and Earth
emitted fluxes (LW in red) reduce SW aliasing of diurnal and seasonal
cycles and should be compared to figure 3 of (1). The gray
region bounds the climate model results.
Fig. 2.
ERBS satellite 36-day precession cycle averages
are used for tropical mean SW, LW, and net radiation anomalies in
comparison to climate model simulations. Compare with figure 4 of
(1). Elimination of the diurnal-cycle aliasing signal
results in a clearer decadal radiation signal in SW and net fluxes,
although some increased variability in the 1990s remains.
Fig. 3.
Anomalies in frequency of occurrence of 500 mb
vertical velocity (left, Pa s
1), cloud amount (%), and
upper troposphere humidity (%) versus time. Red and blue indicate
increased and decreased occurrence, respectively. Major ENSO events are
indicated by horizontal lines. Time series are smoothed with a (1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4.5, 6.5, 8.5, 9.5, 10.5, 11.3, 12, 12.5, 13, 12.5, 12, 11.3, 10.5, 9.5, 8.5, 6.5, 4.5, 3, 2, 1.5, 1) annual average filter; the
x axes are smoothed with a (1-2-4-2-1) filter.
Third, we agree that interannual variability dominates, as indicated
previously (2). The weaker decadal signal emerges only in
the frequency domain. We plotted the time series of anomalies in
frequency of occurrence of several parameters (Fig. 3). The El
Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) weakens the Walker cell,
increasing occurrences of near-zero vertical velocity omega, mid- to
high-range cloud amount, and midrange upper-troposphere relative
humidity (UTH). Decadal variation is seen instead as shifts from
near-zero to extreme high and low omega, and from higher to lower cloud
amount and UTH, between the 1980s and 1990s. The early to mid-1990s do
not resemble ENSO in frequency space. Our decadal subtropical omega
(
7.6 × 10
4 Pa s
1) and LW flux (-2.8 W m
2) changes (2) are each ~1.5% of their
mean values, suggesting that increased subsidence warming balances
increased radiative cooling. The observed cloud decrease from 1985-89
to 1996-99, input to a general circulation model (GCM) radiative transfer model, implies a SW flux decrease of 3.0 W
m
2, similar to the 2.5 W m
2 decrease
observed. Although relationships among the variables in Fig. 3 are
complex and require further study, real evidence exists for consistent
decadal variation in fluxes and independently observed climate
parameters.
Finally, like Trenberth, we also call for more rigorous future observations of climate change. Current global observations are typically designed either for short NASA research missions or for NOAA weather missions at lower accuracy. For example, there is a planned gap in the radiation time series between the end of the NASA Aqua research mission in 2008 and the restart of the National Polar Orbiting Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) weather system in 2012. Until a continuous climate observing system is established, both climate models and observations will remain uncertain.
Bruce A. Wielicki
NASA Langley Research Center
Hampton, VA
23681, USA
E-mail: b.a.wielicki{at}larc.nasa.gov
Anthony D. Del Genio
NASA/Goddard
Institute for Space Studies
2880 Broadway
New York, NY 10025, USA
Takmeng Wong
NASA Langley
Research Center
Junye Chen
Department of Earth
and Environmental Sciences
Columbia
University
Palisades, NY 10964, USA
and NASA/Goddard
Institute
for Space Studies
Barbara E. Carlson
NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies
Richard P. Allan
Hadley Centre
Met
Office
Bracknell, RG12 2SY, UK
Franklin Robertson
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center
Huntsville, AL 35812, USA
Herbert Jacobowitz
NOAA/NESDIS
Camp Springs, MD 20746, USA
Anthony Slingo
Hadley Centre
David A. Randall
Colorodo State
University
Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
Jeffrey
T. Kiehl
National Center for Atmospheric Research
Post
Office Box 3000
Boulder, CO 80303
Brian J. Soden
GFDL/NOAA
Princeton University
Post Office
Box 308
Princeton, NJ 08542, USA
C. T. Gordon
GFDL/NOAA
Princeton
University
Alvin J. Miller
NOAA Climate Prediction
Center/NCEP
Camp Springs, MD 20746, USA
Shi-Keng Yang
NOAA Climate Prediction
Center/NCEP
Joel Susskind
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Huntsville, AL 35812, USA
| 1. | B. A. Wielicki, et al., Science 295, 841 (2002) . |
| 2. | J. Chen, B. E. Carlson, A. D. Del Genio, Science 295, 838 (2002) . |
| 3. | M. R. Luther, et al., Appl. Opt. 25, 3705 (1986) . |
| 4. | C. Frohlich, W. Finsterle, in Recent Insights into the Physics of the Sun and Heliosphere: Highlights from Soho and Other Space Missions, P. Brekke, B. Fleck, J. B. Gurman, Eds. (vol. 203, International Astronomical Union Symposia, Astronomical Society of the Pacific, San Francisco, 2001), p. 105. |
Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)