Confronting the Challenge of Modeling Cloud and Precipitation Microphysics. (31st July 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Morrison, Hugh; van Lier‐Walqui, Marcus; Fridlind, Ann M.; Grabowski, Wojciech W.; Harrington, Jerry Y.; Hoose, Corinna; Korolev, Alexei; Kumjian, Matthew R.; Milbrandt, Jason A.; Pawlowska, Hanna; Posselt, Derek J.; Prat, Olivier P.; Reimel, Karly J.; Shima, Shin‐Ichiro; van Diedenhoven, Bastiaan; Xue, Lulin
• Is Part Of: Journal of advances in modeling earth systems. Volume 12:Number 8(2020)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2020-07-31
• Subjects: microphysics -- clouds -- modeling; Geological modeling -- Periodicals; Climatology -- Periodicals; Geochemical modeling -- Periodicals; 551.5011
• DOI: 10.1029/2019MS001689
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1942-2466

Abstract

Abstract: In the atmosphere, microphysics refers to the microscale processes that affect cloud and precipitation particles and is a key linkage among the various components of Earth's atmospheric water and energy cycles. The representation of microphysical processes in models continues to pose a major challenge leading to uncertainty in numerical weather forecasts and climate simulations. In this paper, the problem of treating microphysics in models is divided into two parts: (i) how to represent the population of cloud and precipitation particles, given the impossibility of simulating all particles individually within a cloud, and (ii) uncertainties in the microphysical process rates owing to fundamental gaps in knowledge of cloud physics. The recently developed Lagrangian particle‐based method is advocated as a way to address several conceptual and practical challenges of representing particle populations using traditional bulk and bin microphysics parameterization schemes. For addressing critical gaps in cloud physics knowledge, sustained investment for observational advances from laboratory experiments, new probe development, and next‐generation instruments in space is needed. Greater emphasis on laboratory work, which has apparently declined over the past several decades relative to other areas of cloud physics research, is argued to be an essential ingredient for improving process‐level understanding. More systematic use of natural cloud and precipitation observations to constrain microphysics schemes is also advocated. Because it is generally difficult to quantify individual microphysical process rates from these observations directly, this presents an inverse problem that can be viewed from the standpoint of Bayesian statistics. Following this idea, a probabilistic framework is proposed that combines elements from statistical and physical modeling. Besides providing rigorous constraint of schemes, there is an added benefit of quantifying uncertainty systematically. Finally, a broader hierarchical approach is proposed to accelerate improvements in microphysics schemes, leveraging the advances described in this paper related to process modeling (using Lagrangian particle‐based schemes), laboratory experimentation, cloud and precipitation observations, and statistical methods. Plain Language Summary: In the atmosphere, microphysics—the small‐scale processes affecting cloud and precipitation particles such as their growth by condensation, evaporation, and melting—is a critical part of Earth's weather and climate. Because it is impossible to simulate every cloud particle individually owing to their sheer number within even a small cloud, atmospheric models have to represent the evolution of particle populations statistically. There are critical gaps in knowledge of the microphysical processes that act on particles, especially for atmospheric ice particles because of their wide variety and intricacy of their shapes. The difficulty of representing cloud and precipitation particle populations and knowledge gaps in cloud processes both introduce important uncertainties into models that translate into uncertainty in weather forecasts and climate simulations, including climate change assessments. We discuss several specific challenges related to these problems. To improve how cloud and precipitation particle populations are represented, we advocate a "particle‐based" approach that addresses several limitations of traditional approaches and has recently gained traction as a tool for cloud modeling. Advances in observations, including laboratory studies, are argued to be essential for addressing gaps in knowledge of microphysical processes. We also advocate using statistical modeling tools to improve how these observations are used to constrain model microphysics. Finally, we discuss a hierarchical approach that combines the various pieces discussed in this article, providing a possible blueprint for accelerating progress in how microphysics is represented in cloud, weather, and climate models. Key Points: Microphysics is an important component of weather and climate models, but its representation in current models is highly uncertain Two critical challenges are identified: representing cloud and precipitation particle populations and knowledge gaps in cloud physics A possible blueprint for addressing these challenges is proposed to accelerate progress in improving microphysics schemes