Articles | Volume 21, issue 16
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12261-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12261-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Deciphering organization of GOES-16 green cumulus through the empirical orthogonal function (EOF) lens
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
Mickaël D. Chekroun
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
Orit Altaratz
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
Related authors
Tom Dror, J. Michel Flores, Orit Altaratz, Guy Dagan, Zev Levin, Assaf Vardi, and Ilan Koren
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15297–15306, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15297-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15297-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We used in situ aerosol measurements over the Atlantic, Caribbean, and Pacific to initialize a cloud model and study the impact of aerosol concentration and sizes on warm clouds. We show that high aerosol concentration increases cloud mass and reduces surface rain when giant particles (diameter > 9 µm) are present. The large aerosols changed the timing and magnitude of internal cloud processes and resulted in an enhanced evaporation below cloud base and dramatically reduced surface rain.
Huan Liu, Ilan Koren, Orit Altaratz, and Shutian Mu
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2574, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2574, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds play a crucial role in Earth's climate by reflecting sunlight and trapping heat. Understanding how clouds respond to global warming (cloud feedback) is essential for climate change. However, the natural climate variability, like ENSO, can distort these estimates. Relying on long-term reanalysis data and simulations, this study finds that ENSO with a typical periodicity of 2–7 years can introduce a significant bias on cloud feedback estimates on even decadal to century time scales.
Manuel Santos Gutiérrez, Mickaël David Chekroun, and Ilan Koren
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.11545, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.11545, 2024
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
This letter explores a novel approach for the formation of cloud droplets in rising adiabatic air parcels. Our approach combines microphysical equations accounting for moisture, updrafts and concentration of aerosols. Our analysis reveals three regimes: A) Low moisture and high concentration can hinder activation; B) Droplets can activate and stabilize above critical sizes, and C) sparse clouds can have droplets exhibiting activation and deactivation cycles.
Huan Liu, Ilan Koren, Orit Altaratz, and Mickaël D. Chekroun
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 6559–6569, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-6559-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-6559-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds' responses to global warming contribute the largest uncertainty in climate prediction. Here, we analyze 42 years of global cloud cover in reanalysis data and show a decreasing trend over most continents and an increasing trend over the tropical and subtropical oceans. A reduction in near-surface relative humidity can explain the decreasing trend in cloud cover over land. Our results suggest potential stress on the terrestrial water cycle, associated with global warming.
Elisa T. Sena, Ilan Koren, Orit Altaratz, and Alexander B. Kostinski
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 16111–16122, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-16111-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-16111-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We used record-breaking statistics together with spatial information to create record-breaking SST maps. The maps reveal warming patterns in the overwhelming majority of the ocean and coherent islands of cooling, where low records occur more frequently than high ones. Some of these cooling spots are well known; however, a surprising elliptical area in the Southern Ocean is observed as well. Similar analyses can be performed on other key climatological variables to explore their trend patterns.
Eshkol Eytan, Ilan Koren, Orit Altaratz, Mark Pinsky, and Alexander Khain
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16203–16217, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16203-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16203-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Describing cloud mixing processes is among the most challenging fronts in cloud physics. Therefore, the adiabatic fraction (AF) that serves as a mixing measure is a valuable metric. We use high-resolution (10 m) simulations of single clouds with a passive tracer to test the skill of different methods used to derive AF. We highlight a method that is insensitive to the available cloud samples and allows considering microphysical effects on AF estimations in different environmental conditions.
Tom Dror, J. Michel Flores, Orit Altaratz, Guy Dagan, Zev Levin, Assaf Vardi, and Ilan Koren
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15297–15306, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15297-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15297-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We used in situ aerosol measurements over the Atlantic, Caribbean, and Pacific to initialize a cloud model and study the impact of aerosol concentration and sizes on warm clouds. We show that high aerosol concentration increases cloud mass and reduces surface rain when giant particles (diameter > 9 µm) are present. The large aerosols changed the timing and magnitude of internal cloud processes and resulted in an enhanced evaporation below cloud base and dramatically reduced surface rain.
Cited articles
Agee, E. M., Chen, T., and Dowell, K.: A review of mesoscale cellular convection, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 54, 1004–1012, 1973. a
Atkinson, B. W. and Wu Zhang, J.: Mesoscale shallow convection in the atmosphere, Rev. Geophys., 34, 403–431, https://doi.org/10.1029/96RG02623, 1996. a
Berg, L. K. and Kassianov, E. I.: Temporal Variability of Fair-Weather Cumulus Statistics at the ACRF SGP Site, J. Climate, 21, 3344–3358, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI2266.1, 2008. a
Berg, L. K., Kassianov, E. I., Long, C. N., and Mills Jr., D. L.: Surface summertime radiative forcing by shallow cumuli at the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Southern Great Plains site, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D01202, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014593, 2011. a
Bony, S.: Marine boundary layer clouds at the heart of tropical cloud feedback uncertainties in climate models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L20806, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023851, 2005. a
Bony, S., Dufresne, J.-L., Le Treut, H., Morcrette, J.-J., and Senior, C.: On dynamic and thermodynamic components of cloud changes, Clim. Dynam., 22, 71–86, 2004. a
Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G.,
Forster, P., Kerminen, V.-M., Kondo, Y., Liao, H., Lohmann,
U., Rasch, P., Satheesh, S. K., Sherwood, S., Stevens, B., and
Zhang, X. Y.: Clouds and aerosols, in: Climate Change 2013:
The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Doschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P. M.: Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom and New York USA, 571–657, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.016, 2013. a
Chekroun, M. and Kondrashov, D.: Data-adaptive harmonic spectra and multilayer Stuart-Landau models, Chaos, 27, 093110, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4989400, 2017. a
Chekroun, M. D., Kondrashov, D., and Ghil, M.: Predicting stochastic systems by noise sampling, and application to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 11766–11771, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1015753108, 2011. a, b
Chen, C., Cane, M. A., Henderson, N., Lee, D. E., Chapman, D., Kondrashov, D., and Chekroun, M.: Diversity, Nonlinearity, Seasonality, and Memory Effect in ENSO Simulation and Prediction Using Empirical Model Reduction, J. Climate, 29, 1809–1830, 2016. a
Cheng, X., Nitsche, G., and Wallace, J. M.: Robustness of low-frequency circulation patterns derived from EOF and rotated EOF analyses, J. Climate, 8, 1709–1713, 1995. a
Dagan, G., Koren, I., Kostinski, A., and Altaratz, O.: Organization and oscillations in simulated shallow convective clouds, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10, 2287–2299, 2018. a
DelSole, T. and Tippett, M. K.: Average predictability time. Part I: theory, J. Atmos. Sci., 66, 1172–1187, 2009. a
Fukuoka, A.: The central meteorological observatory, a study on 10-day forecast (a synthetic report), Geophysical Magazine, 22, 177–208, 1951. a
GOES-R Algorithm Working Group and GOES-R Program Office: NOAA GOES-R Series Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) Level 2 Cloud Top Phase (ACTP), CONUS subset, NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information [data set], https://doi.org/10.7289/V5NP22QW, 2018a. a, b
GOES-R Algorithm Working Group and GOES-R Series Program Office: NOAA GOES-R Series Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) Level 2 Cloud Top Height (ACHA), CONUS subset, NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information [data set], https://doi.org/10.7289/V5HX19ZQ, 2018.
GOES-R Calibration Working Group and GOES-R Series Program: NOAA GOES-R Series Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) Level 1b Radiances, CONUS subset, NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information [data set], https://doi.org/10.7289/V5BV7DSR, 2017. a
Greene, C. A., Thirumalai, K., Kearney, K. A., Delgado, J. M., Schwanghart, W., Wolfenbarger, N. S., Thyng, K. M., Gwyther, D. E., Gardner, A. S., and Blankenship, D. D.: The climate data toolbox for MATLAB, Geochem. Geophy. Geosy., 20, 3774–3781, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GC008392, 2019. a
Groth, A. and Ghil, M.: Multivariate singular spectrum analysis and the road to phase synchronization, Phys. Rev. E, 84, 036206, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.84.036206, 2011. a
Hannachi, A., Jolliffe, I., Stephenson, D., and Trendafilov, N.: In search of simple structures in climate: simplifying EOFs, Int. J. Climatol., 26, 7–28, 2006. a
Hauf, T. and Clark, T. L.: Three-dimensional numerical experiments on convectively forced internal gravity waves, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 115, 309–333, 1989. a
Heiblum, R. H., Koren, I., and Feingold, G.: On the link between Amazonian forest properties and shallow cumulus cloud fields, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 6063–6074, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-6063-2014, 2014. a
Heus, T. and Seifert, A.: Automated tracking of shallow cumulus clouds in large domain, long duration large eddy simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 1261–1273, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-1261-2013, 2013. a
Hinkelman, L. and Evans, K.: Anisotropy in Broken Cloud Fields Over Oklahoma
from Landsat Data, Fourteenth ARM Science Team Meeting Proceedings,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 22–26 March 2004. a
Horel, J. D.: A rotated principal component analysis of the interannual variability of the Northern Hemisphere 500 mb height field, Mon. Weather Rev., 109, 2080–2092, 1981. a
Jaeckisch, H.: Synoptic conditions of wave formation above convective streets, OSTIV Publications, Braunschweig, Germany, 12, 1972. a
Jakub, F. and Mayer, B.: The role of 1-D and 3-D radiative heating in the organization of shallow cumulus convection and the formation of cloud streets, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 13317–13327, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-13317-2017, 2017. a
Jolliffe, I.: Principal Component Analysis, 2nd Edn., Springer, New York, 2002. a
Kawamura, R.: A rotated EOF analysis of global sea surface temperature variability with interannual and interdecadal scales, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 24, 707–715, 1994. a
Klitch, M. A., Weaver, J. F., Kelly, F. P., and Vonder Haar, T. H.: Convective cloud climatologies constructed from satellite imagery, Mon. Weather Rev., 113, 326–337, 1985. a
Kondrashov, D., Chekroun, M., and Berloff, P.: Multiscale Stuart-Landau emulators: Application to wind-driven ocean gyres, Fluids, 3, 21, https://doi.org/10.3390/fluids3010021, 2018a. a
Kondrashov, D., Chekroun, M. D., Yuan, X., and Ghil, M.: Data-adaptive harmonic decomposition and stochastic modeling of Arctic sea ice, in: Advances in Nonlinear Geosciences, edited by: A. Tsonis, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 179–205, 2018b. a
Koren, I.: Data from: Deciphering Organization of GOES–16 Green Cumulus, through the EOF lens, The Weizmann Institute of Science [data set], https://doi.org/10.34933/wis.000007, 2020. a
Lane, T. P.: Convectively generated gravity waves, in: Encyclopedia of Atmospheric Sciences, 2nd Edn., Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherland, 171–179, 2015. a
Lane, T. P. and Reeder, M. J.: Convectively generated gravity waves and their effect on the cloud environment, J. Atmos. Sci., 58, 2427–2440, 2001. a
Lorenz, E. N.: Empirical orthogonal functions and statistical weather
prediction, Scientific Report no. 1, Statistical Forecasting Project, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Meteorology Cambridge,
1956. a
Melfi, S. and Palm, S. P.: Estimating the orientation and spacing of midlatitude linear convective boundary layer features: Cloud streets, J. Atmos. Sci., 69, 352–364, 2012. a
Messié, M. and Chavez, F.: Global modes of sea surface temperature variability in relation to regional climate indices, J. Climate, 24, 4314–4331, 2011. a
Mestas-Nuñez, A. M. and Enfield, D. B.: Rotated global modes of non-ENSO sea surface temperature variability, J. Climate, 12, 2734–2746, 1999. a
Monahan, A. H., Fyfe, J. C., Ambaum, M. H., Stephenson, D. B., and North, G. R.: Empirical orthogonal functions: The medium is the message, J. Climate, 22, 6501–6514, 2009. a
Müller, D., Etling, D., Kottmeier, C., and Roth, R.: On the occurrence of cloud streets over northern Germany, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 111, 761–772, 1985. a
Nair, U., Weger, R., Kuo, K., and Welch, R.: Clustering, randomness, and regularity in cloud fields: 5. The nature of regular cumulus cloud fields, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 103, 11363–11380, 1998. a
Nappo, C. J.: An Introduction to Atmospheric Gravity Waves, Academic press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 2013. a
NASA JPL: NASA Shuttle Radar Topography Mission Global 1 arc second, SRTMGL1 v003, NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/MEaSUREs/SRTM/SRTMGL1.003, 2013. a
Norris, J. R.: Low cloud type over the ocean from surface observations. Part II: Geographical and seasonal variations, J. Climate, 11, 383–403, 1998. a
Nuijens, L. and Siebesma, A. P.: Boundary layer clouds and convection over subtropical oceans in our current and in a warmer climate, Current Climate Change Reports, 5, 80–94, 2019. a
Penland, C. and Magorian, T.: Prediction of Niño 3 sea surface temperatures using linear inverse modeling, J. Climate, 6, 1067–1076, 1993. a
Penland, C. and Sardeshmukh, P. D.: The optimal growth of tropical sea surface temperature anomalies, J. Climate, 8, 1999–2024, 1995. a
Rabin, R. M. and Martin, D. W.: Satellite observations of shallow cumulus coverage over the central United States: An exploration of land use impact on cloud cover, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 101, 7149–7155, 1996. a
Ray, D. K., Nair, U. S., Welch, R. M., Han, Q., Zeng, J., Su, W., Kikuchi, T., and Lyons, T. J.: Effects of land use in Southwest Australia: 1. Observations of cumulus cloudiness and energy fluxes, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4414, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002654, 2003. a
Richman, M. B.: Obliquely rotated principal components: An improved meteorological map typing technique?, J. Appl. Meteorol., 20, 1145–1159, 1981. a
Richman, M. B.: Rotation of principal components, J. Climatol., 6, 293–335, 1986. a
Roundy, P. E. and Schreck III, C. J.: A combined wave-number–frequency and time-extended EOF approach for tracking the progress of modes of large-scale organized tropical convection, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 135, 161–173, 2009. a
Schmit, T., Gunshor, M., Fu, G., Rink, T., Bah, K., and Wolf, W.: GOES-R Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document for: Cloud and Moisture Imagery Product (CMIP), University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA, 2010. a
Seifert, A. and Heus, T.: Large-eddy simulation of organized precipitating trade wind cumulus clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5631–5645, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5631-2013, 2013. a, b
Simpson, J.: Cumulus clouds: Early aircraft observations and entrainment hypotheses, in: Mesoscale Meteorology – Theories, Observations and Models, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 355–373, 1983. a
Stevens, B., Bony, S., Brogniez, H., Hentgen, L., Hohenegger, C., Kiemle, C., L'Ecuyer, T., Naumann, A., Schulz, H., Siebesma, P., Vial, J., Winker, D., and Zuidema, P.: Sugar, gravel, fish and
flowers: Mesoscale cloud patterns in the trade winds, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 146,
1–12, 2019. a
Stull, R. B.: Internal gravity waves generated by penetrative convection, J. Atmos. Sci., 33, 1279–1286, 1976. a
Thompson, D. W. and Wallace, J. M.: The Arctic Oscillation signature in the wintertime geopotential height and temperature fields, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 1297–1300, 1998. a
Tobin, I., Bony, S., and Roca, R.: Observational evidence for relationships between the degree of aggregation of deep convection, water vapor, surface fluxes, and radiation, J. Climate, 25, 6885–6904, 2012. a
Tsuda, T.: Characteristics of atmospheric gravity waves observed using the MU (Middle and Upper atmosphere) radar and GPS (Global Positioning System) radio occultation, P. Jpn. Acad. B-Phys., 90, 12–27, 2014. a
Turner, D. D., Vogelmann, A. M., Austin, R. T., Barnard, J. C., Cady-Pereira, K., Chiu, J. C., Clough, S. A., Flynn, C., Khaiyer, M. M., Liljegren, J., Johnson, K., Lin, B., Long, C., Marshak, A., Matrosov, S. Y., McFarlane, S. A., Miller, M., Min, Q., Minimis, P., O'Hirok, W., Wang, Z., and Wiscombe, W.: Thin liquid water clouds: their importance and our challenge, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 88, 177–190, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-88-2-177, 2007. a
Vial, J., Bony, S., Stevens, B., and Vogel, R.: Mechanisms and model diversity of trade-wind shallow cumulus cloud feedbacks: a review, in: Shallow Clouds, Water Vapor, Circulation, and Climate Sensitivity, Springer, NYC, NY, USA, 159–181, 2017. a
Weare, B. C. and Nasstrom, J. S.: Examples of extended empirical orthogonal function analyses, Mon. Weather Rev., 110, 481–485, 1982. a
Webb, M. J., Senior, C., Sexton, D., Ingram, W., Williams, K., Ringer, M., McAvaney, B., Colman, R., Soden, B. J., Gudgel, R., Knutson, T., Emori, S., Ogura, T., Tsushima, Y., Andronova, N., Li, B., Musat, I., Bony, S., and Taylor, K. E.: On the contribution of local feedback mechanisms to the range of climate sensitivity in two GCM ensembles, Clim. Dynam., 27, 17–38, 2006. a
Weckwerth, T. M., Wilson, J. W., Wakimoto, R. M., and Crook, N. A.: Horizontal convective rolls: Determining the environmental conditions supporting their existence and characteristics, Mon. Weather Rev., 125, 505–526, 1997. a
Wing, A. A. and Emanuel, K. A.: Physical mechanisms controlling self-aggregation of convection in idealized numerical modeling simulations, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 6, 59–74, 2014. a
Xue, H., Feingold, G., and Stevens, B.: Aerosol effects on clouds, precipitation, and the organization of shallow cumulus convection, J. Atmos. Sci., 65, 392–406, 2008. a
Zelinka, M. D., Myers, T. A., McCoy, D. T., Po-Chedley, S., Caldwell, P. M., Ceppi, P., Klein, S. A., and Taylor, K. E.: Causes of higher climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2019GL085782, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085782, 2020. a
Zhang, Y. and Klein, S. A.: Factors Controlling the Vertical Extent of Fair-Weather Shallow Cumulus Clouds over Land: Investigation of Diurnal-Cycle Observations Collected at the ARM Southern Great Plains Site, J. Atmos. Sci., 70, 1297–1315, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-12-0131.1, 2013. a, b
Zhu, P.: Large eddy simulations of continental shallow cumulus convection, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4453, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003119, 2003. a
Zhu, P. and Albrecht, B.: A theoretical and observational analysis on the formation of fair-weather cumuli, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 1983–2005, 2002. a
Zhu, T., Lee, J., Weger, R., and Welch, R.: Clustering, randomness, and regularity in cloud fields: 2. Cumulus cloud fields, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 97, 20537–20558, 1992. a
Short summary
A part of continental shallow convective cumulus (Cu) was shown to share properties such as organization and formation over vegetated areas, thus named green Cu. Mechanisms behind the formed patterns are not understood. We use different metrics and an empirical orthogonal function (EOF) to decompose the dataset and quantify organization factors (cloud streets and gravity waves). We show that clouds form a highly organized grid structure over hundreds of kilometers at the field lifetime.
A part of continental shallow convective cumulus (Cu) was shown to share properties such as...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint