The sensitivity of snowpack sublimation estimates to instrument and measurement uncertainty perturbed in a Monte Carlo framework

D.M. HULTSTRAND, S.R. FASSNACHT

PDF(1069 KB)
PDF(1069 KB)
Front. Earth Sci. ›› 2018, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (4) : 728-738. DOI: 10.1007/s11707-018-0721-0
RESEARCH ARTICLE
RESEARCH ARTICLE

The sensitivity of snowpack sublimation estimates to instrument and measurement uncertainty perturbed in a Monte Carlo framework

Author information +
History +

Abstract

The bulk aerodynamic flux equation is often used to estimate snowpack sublimation since it requires meteorological measurements at only one height above the snow surface. However, to date the uncertainty of these estimates and the individual input variables and input parameters uncertainty have not been quantified. We modeled sublimation for three (average snowpack in 2005, deep snowpack in 2011, and shallow snowpack in 2012) different water years (October 1 to September 30) at West Glacier Lake watershed within the Glacier Lakes Ecosystem Experiments Site in Wyoming. We performed a Monte Carlo analysis to evaluate the sensitivity of modeled sublimation to uncertainties of the input variables and parameters from the bulk aerodynamic flux equation. Input variable time series were uniformly adjusted by a normally distributed random variable with a standard deviation given as follows: 1) the manufacturer’s stated instrument accuracy of 0.3°C for temperature (T), 0.3 m/s for wind speed (Uz), 2% for relative humidity (RH), and 1 mb for pressure (P); 2) 0.0093 m for the aerodynamic roughness length (z0) based on z0 profiles calculations from multiple heights; and 3) 0.08 m for measurement height (z). Often z is held constant; here we used a constant z compared to the ground surface, and subsequently altered z to account for the change in snow depth (ds). The most important source of uncertainty was z0, then RH. Accounting for measurement height as it changed due to snowpack accumulation/ablation was also relevant for deeper snow. Snow surface sublimation uncertainties, from this study, are in the range of 1% to 29% for individual input parameter perturbations. The mean cumulative uncertainty was 41% for the three water years with 55%, 37%, and 32% occurring for the wet, average, and low water years. The top three variables (z varying with ds, z0, and RH) accounted for 74% to 84% of the cumulative sublimation uncertainty.

Keywords

snow / sublimation / uncertainty / aerodynamic methods

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
D.M. HULTSTRAND, S.R. FASSNACHT. The sensitivity of snowpack sublimation estimates to instrument and measurement uncertainty perturbed in a Monte Carlo framework. Front. Earth Sci., 2018, 12(4): 728‒738 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-018-0721-0

References

[1]
Andreas E L (2002). Parameterizing scalar transfer over snow and ice: a review. J Hydrometeorol, 3(4): 417–432
CrossRef Google scholar
[2]
Bernier P, Edwards G C (1989). Differences between air and snow surface temperatures during snow evaporation. In: Proceedings of Eastern Snow Conference, 46: 117–120
[3]
Bliss A, Cuffey K, Kavanaugh J (2011). Sublimation and surface energy budget of Taylor Glacier, Antarctica. J Glaciol, 57(204): 684–696
CrossRef Google scholar
[4]
Bowling L C, Pomeroy J W, Lettenmaier D P (2004). Parameterization of blowing-snow sublimation in a macroscale hydrology model. J Hydrometeorol, 5(5): 745–762
CrossRef Google scholar
[5]
Box J E, Steffen K (2001). Sublimation on the Greenland ice sheet from automated weather station observations. J Geophys Res, 106(D24): 33965–33981
CrossRef Google scholar
[6]
Brock B W, Willis I C, Sharp M J (2006). Measurement and parameterization of aerodynamic roughness length variations at Haut Glacier d’Arolla, Switzerland. J Glaciol, 52(177): 281–297
CrossRef Google scholar
[7]
Cline D (1997a). Snow surface energy exchanges and snowmelt at a continental, midlatitude alpine site. Water Resour Res, 33(4): 689–701
CrossRef Google scholar
[8]
Cline D (1997b). Effect of seasonality of snow accumulation and melt on snow surface energy exchanges at a continental Alpine site. J Appl Meteorol, 36(1): 32–51
CrossRef Google scholar
[9]
Datt P (2011). Latent Heat of Sublimation. In: Singh V P, Singh P, Haritashya U K, eds. Encyclopedia of Snow, Ice and Glaciers, Encyclopedia of Earth Sciences Series. Dordrecht: Springer
[10]
Dingman S L (2002). Physical Hydrology. 2nd ed, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 646 pp
[11]
Fassnacht S R (2004). Estimating alter-shielded gauge snowfall undercatch, snowpack sublimation, and blowing snow transport at six sites in the coterminous USA. Hydrol Processes, 18(18): 3481–3492
CrossRef Google scholar
[12]
Fassnacht S R (2010). Temporal changes in small scale snowpack surface roughness length for sublimation estimates in hydrological modeling. Cuadernos de Investigación Geográfica, 36(1): 43–57
CrossRef Google scholar
[50]
Fassnacht S R, Oprea I, Shipman P, Kirkpatrick J, Borleske J, Motta F, Kamin D J (2015). Geometric Methods in the Study of the Snow Surface Roughness. Proceedings of the 35th Annual American Geophysical Union Hydrology Days Conference. Fort Collins, Colorado, 41–50
CrossRef Google scholar
[13]
Graham C B, van Verseveld W, Barnard H R, McDonnell J J (2010). Estimating the deep seepage component of the hillslope and catchment water balance within a measurement uncertainty framework. Hydrol Processes, 24(25): 3631–3647
CrossRef Google scholar
[14]
Hastings W K (1970). Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika, 57(1): 97–109
CrossRef Google scholar
[15]
Hollinger D Y, Richardson A D (2005). Uncertainty in eddy covariance measurements and its application to physiological models. Tree Physiol, 25(7): 873–885
CrossRef Google scholar
[16]
Hood E, Williams M, Cline D (1999). Sublimation from a seasonal snowpack at a continental mid-latitude alpine site. Hydrol Processes, 13(12–13): 1781–1797
CrossRef Google scholar
[17]
Hultstrand D M (2006). Geostatistical Methods for Estimating Snowmelt Contribution to the Seasonal Water Balance in an Alpine Watershed. Dissertation for Master degree. Watershed Science Program, Colorado State University, 130 pp
[18]
Hunsaker C T, Whitaker T W, Bales R C (2012). Snowmelt runoff and water yield along elevation and temperature gradients in California’s Southern Sierra Nevada. J Am Water Resour Assoc, 48(4): 667–678
CrossRef Google scholar
[19]
Kattelmann R, Elder K (1991). Hydrologic characteristics and water balance of an alpine basin in the Sierra Nevada. Water Resour Res, 27(7): 1553–1562
CrossRef Google scholar
[20]
Korfmacher J L, Hultstrand D M (2006). Glacier Lakes Ecosystem Experiments Site (GLEES) hourly meteorological tower data: 1989–2005. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO
[21]
Lang H (1981). Is evaporation an important component in high alpine hydrology? Nord Hydrol, 12(4–5): 217–224
CrossRef Google scholar
[22]
Liston G E, Elder K (2006a). A meteorological distribution system for high-resolution terrestrial modeling (MicroMet). J Hydrometeorol, 7(2): 217–234
CrossRef Google scholar
[23]
Liston G E, Elder K (2006b). A distributed snow-evolution modeling system (snowmodel). J Hydrometeorol, 7(6): 1259–1276
CrossRef Google scholar
[24]
Marks D, Cooley K R, Robertson D C, Winstral A (2001). Long-term snow database, Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed, Idaho, United States. Water Resour Res, 37(11): 2835–2838
CrossRef Google scholar
[25]
Marks D, Dozier J (1992). Climate and energy exchange at the snow surface in the alpine region of the Sierra Nevada. Water Resour Res, 28(11): 3043–3054
CrossRef Google scholar
[26]
Marks D, Dozier J, Davis R E (1992). Climate and energy exchange at the snow surface in the alpine region of the Sierra Nevada: meteorological measurements and monitoring. Water Resour Res, 28(11): 3029–3042
CrossRef Google scholar
[27]
Marks D, Kimball J, Tingey D, Link T (1998). The sensitivity of snowmelt processes to climate conditions and forest cover during rain-on-snow: a study of the 1996 Pacific Northwest flood. Hydrol Processes, 12(10–11): 1569–1587
CrossRef Google scholar
[28]
Marks D, Winstral A, Flerchinger G, Reba M, Pomeroy J, Link T, Elder K (2008). Comparing simulated and measured sensible and latent heat fluxes over snow under a pine canopy. J Hydrometeorol, 9(6): 1506–1522
CrossRef Google scholar
[29]
Molotch N P, Blanken P D, Williams M W, Turnipseed A A, Monson R K, Margulis S A (2007). Estimating sublimation of intercepted and sub-canopy snow using eddy covariance systems. Hydrol Processes, 21(12): 1567–1575
CrossRef Google scholar
[30]
Moore R D (1983). On the use of the bulk aerodynamic formulae over melting snow. Nord Hydrol, 14(4): 193–206
CrossRef Google scholar
[31]
Musselman R C (1994). The Glacier Lakes Ecosystem Experiments Site. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report RM-249, 94 pp
[32]
Ohmura A (1981). Climate and energy balance on arctic tundra, Axel Heiberg Island, Canadian Arctic Archipelago, Spring and Summer 1969, 1970 and 1972. Zürcher Geographische Schriften, 3, Dept. of Geography, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zürich, 447 pp
[33]
Pan M, Sheffield J, Wood E F, Mitchell K E, Houser P R, Schaake J C, Robock A, Lohmann D, Cosgrove B, Duan Q Y, Luo L F, Wayne Higgins R, Pinker R T, Dan Tarpley J (2003). Snow process modeling in the North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS): 2. Evaluation of model-simulated snow water equivalent. J Geophys Res, 108(D22): 8850
CrossRef Google scholar
[34]
Phillips M (2013). Estimates of sublimation in the Upper Colorado River basin. Unpublished Master of Science Thesis, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, 57pp
CrossRef Google scholar
[35]
Pomeroy J W, Bewley D, Essery R H, Hedstrom N, Link T, Granger R, Sicart J, Ellis C, Janowicz J R (2006). Shrub tundra snowmelt. Hydrol Processes, 20(4): 923–941
CrossRef Google scholar
[36]
Pomeroy J W, Essery R L H (1999). Turbulent fluxes during blowing snow: field tests of model sublimation predictions. Hydrol Processes, 13(18): 2963–2975
CrossRef Google scholar
[37]
Raleigh M S, Landry C C, Hayashi M, Quinton W L, Lundquist J D (2013). Approximating snow surface temperature from standard temperature and humidity data: new possibilities for snow model and remote sensing evaluation. Water Resour Res, 49(12): 8053–8069
CrossRef Google scholar
[38]
Reba M L, Pomeroy J, Marks D, Link T E (2012). Estimating surface sublimation losses from snowpacks in a mountain catchment using eddy covariance and turbulent transfer calculations. Hydrol Processes, 26(24): 3699–3711
CrossRef Google scholar
[39]
Ryan W A, Doesken N J, Fassnacht S R (2008). Evaluation of ultrasonic snow depth sensors for U.S. snow measurements. J Atmos Ocean Technol, 25(5): 667–684
CrossRef Google scholar
[40]
Saucier W J (1983). Principles of Meteorological Analysis. Mineola: Dover Earth Science, 464pp
[41]
Sexstone G A, Clow D W, Fassnacht S R, Liston G E, Hiemstra C A, Knowles J F, Penn C A (2018). Snow sublimation in mountain environments and its sensitivity to forest disturbance and climate warming. Water Resour Res, 54(2): 1191–1211
CrossRef Google scholar
[42]
Sexstone G A, Clow D W, Stannard D I, Fassnacht S R (2016). Comparison of methods for quantifying surface sublimation over seasonally snow-covered terrain. Hydrol Processes, 30(19): 3373–3389
CrossRef Google scholar
[43]
Sheffield J, Pan M, Wood E F, Mitchell K E, Houser P R, Schaake J C, Robock A, Lohmann D, Cosgrove B, Duan Q Y, Luo L F, Wayne Higgins, Pinker R T, Dan Tarpley J, Ramsay B H (2003). Snow process modeling in the North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS): 1. Evaluation of model-simulated snow cover extent. J Geophys Res, 108(D22): 8849
CrossRef Google scholar
[44]
Slater A G, Schlosser C A, Desborough C E, Pitman A J, Henderson-Sellers A, Robock A, Vinnikov K Y, Mitchell K, Boone A, Braden H, Chen F, Cox P M, de Rosnay P, Dickinson R E, Dickinson R E, Dai Y J, Duan Q, Entin J, Etchevers P, Gedney N, Gusev Y M, Habets F, Kim J, Koren V, Kowalczyk E A, Nasonova O N, Noilhan J, Schaake S, Shmakin A B, Smirnova T G, Verseghy D, Wetzel P, Xue Y, Yang Z L, Zeng Q (2001). The representation of snow in land surface schemes: results from PILPS 2(d). J Hydrometeorol, 2(1): 7–25
CrossRef Google scholar
[45]
Stewart B J (1982). Sensitivity and Significance of Turbulent Energy Exchange over an Alpine Snow Surface. Dissertation for Master degree. University of California, Santa Barbara, CA
[46]
Strasser U, Warscher M, Liston G E (2011). Modeling snow canopy processes on an idealized mountain. J Hydrometeorol, 12(4): 663–677
CrossRef Google scholar
[47]
Svoma B M (2016). Difficulties in determining snowpack sublimation in complex terrain at the macroscale. Adv Meteorol, 2016: 9695757
CrossRef Google scholar
[48]
Woo M, Marsh P, Pomeroy J W (2000). Snow, frozen soils and permafrost hydrology in Canada, 1995–1998. Hydrol Processes, 14(9): 1591–1611
CrossRef Google scholar
[49]
Wooldridge G L, Musselman R C, Sommerfeld R A, Fox D G, Connell B H (1996). Mean wind patterns and snow depth in an alpine-subalpine ecosystem as measured by damage to coniferous trees. J Appl Ecol, 33(1): 100–108
CrossRef Google scholar

Acknowledgements

We wish to express our thanks to all who assisted in field work and data collection in the Glacier Lakes Ecosystems Experiments Site over the years. We express our gratitude to Dr. Robert Musselman and John Korfmacher of the Rocky Mountain Research Station (RMRS) for providing logistical support, data access, and winter site access for this research. Partial funding for SRF was provided by the National Science Foundation project “Pattern Formation and Spatiotemporal Complex Dynamics in Extended Anisotropic Systems” (PI Iuliana Oprea; award number DMS-1615909). We thank the two anonymous reviewers who provided some excellent feedback on this paper; their comments have improved this paper.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2018 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature
AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF(1069 KB)

Accesses

Citations

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/