the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Parameterizations for global thundercloud corona discharge distributions
Abstract. Four parameterizations have been developed to simulate global distributions of thundercloud streamer corona discharges (also known as Blue LUminous Events or BLUEs) mainly producing bluish optical emissions associated to the second positive system of N2 accompanied by no (or hardly detectable) 777.4 nm light emission. BLUEs occur globally between about 7 and 12 times less frequently (Soler et al., 2022) than lightning flashes. The four schemes are based on nonlinear functions of the cloud top height (CTH), the product of the convective available potential energy (CAPE) and total precipitation (TP), the product of CAPE and specific cloud liquid water content (CLWC), and the product of CAPE and specific cloud snow water content (CSWC). Considering that thunderstorms occur on hourly timescales, these parameterizations have been tested using ERA5 hourly data (except for CTH, not available in ERA5) for the meteorological variables considered, finding that the proposed BLUE schemes work fine and are consistent with observations by ASIM. Moreover, the parameterizations have been implemented in a global chemistry-climate model that generates annual and seasonal global distributions for present day and end of 21st century climate scenarios. Present day predictions are in good agreement with recent observations by the Atmosphere Space Interaction Monitor (ASIM).
- Preprint
(3575 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(14793 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 21 May 2024)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-132', Anonymous Referee #2, 23 Apr 2024
reply
The manuscript is based on ASIM observation (BLUEs over cloud top) and make the parameter (CTH, CAPE, TP, CLWC, CSWC) fitting algorithm for BLUE occurrence rate using ECMWF ERA5 data. Then, authors used ASIM BLUEs occurrence rate to validate the adopted parameterization. Finally, they predict results with EMAC models and conclude that 17-28% large than present day model. The in-cloud corona schemes can help to understand the contribution of greenhouse gas and oxidant species from BLUEs.
I thoroughly enjoyed reviewing this manuscript and only have some minor requests for revision.
ASIM only recorded BLUEs at nighttime. Hence, the corona parameterizations with CAPE, TP, CLWC and CSWC were only validated at nighttime. In general, thunderstorm activity is expected to be more intense in the afternoon than nighttime since updraft are weaker without heating by sunlight. Are there any assumptions for BLUEs occurrence rate for nighttime or daytime?
The flash occurrence rate are several times larger than BLUEs. Is any significant difference between flash and BLUEs occurrence rate?
Do you explain more about the contribution of greenhouse gas and oxidant species for BLUEs? Authors are encouraged to claim more important effects on the future weather system.
It is unclear that how the RCP6.0(Representative Concentration Pathway 6.0) affect the BLUEs occurrence rate? What is the important implication of climate changes for BLUEs rates?
Solar activity and aerosol from human activity may be related with climate change. In your modeling results, do you consider other external factors, e.g., solar radiation or aerosols and their relation to climate change. Bedsides, volcanic eruption or human activity will be the unexpected factors in your models.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-132-RC1
Data sets
Monthly averaged in-cloud coronas extracted from EMAC simulations (T42L90MA resolution S. Soler et al. https://zenodo.org/records/10409961
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
120 | 21 | 11 | 152 | 17 | 6 | 7 |
- HTML: 120
- PDF: 21
- XML: 11
- Total: 152
- Supplement: 17
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 7
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1