Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

IEM Reanalysis too coarse for WEPP usage in the mountains #212

Open
akrherz opened this issue Feb 8, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

IEM Reanalysis too coarse for WEPP usage in the mountains #212

akrherz opened this issue Feb 8, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@akrherz
Copy link
Member

akrherz commented Feb 8, 2024

At the team call today, a comparison was shown with DEP's 0.01x0.01 climate files performing very poorly in the mountains. At issue was temperatures being too warm and not producing enough snow within the WEPP algorithm for snow generation. It seems clear to me that the 0.125x0.125 IEMRE domain is too coarse for provision of temperature information. I have great gnashing of teeth at the moment resolving how I wish to proceed. Step 1 is creating this issue 😆

@akrherz akrherz added the bug label Feb 8, 2024
@akrherz akrherz self-assigned this Feb 8, 2024
@akrherz
Copy link
Member Author

akrherz commented Feb 8, 2024

Some debugging cruft here for our CLI file of interest 109.31x033.65.cli

crude yearly means

tmax tmin rad wvl wdir tdew maxr bpcount pcpn rfactor
2007 25.0567 8.20164 511.57 2.87233 0 -0.456986 2.42827 1.74521 2.3314 3.59376
2008 23.8175 7.2847 520.505 3.49973 0 -2.05984 3.72055 1.81421 2.73123 4.46316
2009 24.5534 7.40466 510.373 3.38521 0 -1.51562 1.5854 1.2274 1.50123 1.56463
2010 22.8321 7.19178 523.696 3.46795 0 -0.691233 2.66487 1.54795 2.30995 6.71424
2011 23.5118 6.56219 533.822 3.71068 0 -2.41068 1.42579 1.28767 1.66195 0.982563
2012 25.1112 6.47705 530.781 3.2194 0 -2.23361 1.75945 1.0765 1.47257 1.75355
2013 23.614 5.88904 517.025 3.35068 0 -2.05123 2.32608 1.43288 1.95121 3.34223
2014 24.6447 6.62959 493.271 3.53178 0 -1.56082 2.83931 1.19452 1.66479 4.46618
2015 23.909 6.57205 472.082 3.32 0 1.22795 2.24426 1.50685 2.10649 2.16183
2016 22.2022 4.74126 498.003 3.55383 0 -1.51885 1.44507 1.21311 1.64489 1.46649
2017 23.2589 5.82986 495.323 3.75041 0 -2.46849 1.90286 1.08219 1.40671 2.10515
2018 22.6907 4.59973 492.184 3.70904 0 -2.54548 1.94569 1.20822 1.71553 2.1666
2019 20.9392 5.12904 487.362 3.79068 0 -1.8537 2.61769 1.66849 2.45205 3.90069
2020 22.9153 5.69508 510.09 4.12896 0 -2.85847 1.25308 0.863388 1.07784 1.05372
2021 22.1214 5.58 488.542 4.12329 0 -2.05534 2.86936 1.35616 1.93458 3.33954
2022 21.3655 5.38055 488.619 4.04356 0 -1.53534 3.19398 1.29863 1.8889 2.78217
2023 21.5907 4.34986 508.781 4.0874 0 -2.39863 2.30976 1.05753 1.59189 1.8498
2024 22.8251 5.63033 507.473 4.10765 0 -2.66585 1.73132 1 1.33801 1.38571

I think 2015 was a year of interest, for prism this is grid cell i=231, j=377 , PRISM has an average high of 16.2C and low of 1.6C, yikes. It also has 656 mm of precip, whereas DEP has 605.9, so that's not horrible, like temperature.

akrherz added a commit to akrherz/iem that referenced this issue Feb 9, 2024
@akrherz
Copy link
Member Author

akrherz commented Feb 9, 2024

The good news is that I had a lucid dream last night about this situation and believe now that I do not need to increase IEMRE's grid resolution just yet. The major issue was a lack of using high-res inputs to drive the 0.125 degree analysis. Feverishly cranking knobs to get a new downstream assessment of the situation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant