skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: The Earth System Prediction Suite: Toward a Coordinated U.S. Modeling Capability

Abstract

The Earth System Prediction Suite (ESPS) is a collection of flagship U.S. weather and climate models and model components that are being instrumented to conform to interoperability conventions, documented to follow metadata standards, and made available either under open-source terms or to credentialed users. Furthermore, the ESPS represents a culmination of efforts to create a common Earth system model architecture, and the advent of increasingly coordinated model development activities in the United States. ESPS component interfaces are based on the Earth System Modeling Framework (ESMF), community-developed software for building and coupling models, and the National Unified Operational Prediction Capability (NUOPC) Layer, a set of ESMF-based component templates and interoperability conventions. Our shared infrastructure simplifies the process of model coupling by guaranteeing that components conform to a set of technical and semantic behaviors. The ESPS encourages distributed, multiagency development of coupled modeling systems; controlled experimentation and testing; and exploration of novel model configurations, such as those motivated by research involving managed and interactive ensembles. ESPS codes include the Navy Global Environmental Model (NAVGEM), the Hybrid Coordinate Ocean Model (HYCOM), and the Coupled Ocean–Atmosphere Mesoscale Prediction System (COAMPS); the NOAA Environmental Modeling System (NEMS) and the Modular Ocean Model (MOM); the Communitymore » Earth System Model (CESM); and the NASA ModelE climate model and the Goddard Earth Observing System Model, version 5 (GEOS-5), atmospheric general circulation model.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [3];  [4];  [4];  [5];  [1];  [6];  [7];  [7];  [3];  [8];  [9];  [10];  [10];  [11];  [11];  [10];  [10];  [12] more »; ;  [13];  [14];  [15];  [16];  [17];  [18];  [2] « less
  1. Science Applications International Corporation, McLean, VA (United States)
  2. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), ESRL and CIRES, Boulder, CO (United States)
  3. Naval Research Lab. (NRL), Stennis Space Center, MS (United States)
  4. Cherokee Services Group, Fort Collins, CO (United States)
  5. National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO (United States)
  6. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/ESRL and CIRES, Boulder, CO (United States)
  7. Naval Research Lab., Monterey, CA (United States)
  8. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/NWS/NCEP and Modeling Center, College Park, MD (United States)
  9. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), NWS, NCEP and Modeling Center, College Park, MD (United States)
  10. NASA Goddard Inst. for Space Studies (GISS), New York, NY (United States)
  11. NASA Jet Propulsion Lab., Pasadena, CA (United States)
  12. Princeton Univ., NJ (United States). Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Lab.
  13. Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Lemont, IL (United States)
  14. Univ. of Miami, FL (United States)
  15. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA (United States)
  16. Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command, Silver Spring, MD (United States)
  17. Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA (United States). Applied Physics Lab.
  18. Univ. of Colorado, Boulder, CO (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Science (SC), Biological and Environmental Research (BER) (SC-23)
OSTI Identifier:
1361021
Grant/Contract Number:
AC02-06CH11357
Resource Type:
Journal Article: Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 97; Journal Issue: 7; Journal ID: ISSN 0003-0007
Publisher:
American Meteorological Society
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
58 GEOSCIENCES; 54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Citation Formats

Theurich, Gerhard, DeLuca, C., Campbell, T., Liu, F., Saint, K., Vertenstein, M., Chen, J., Oehmke, R., Doyle, J., Whitcomb, T., Wallcraft, A., Iredell, M., Black, T., Da Silva, A. M., Clune, T., Ferraro, R., Li, P., Kelley, M., Aleinov, I., Balaji, V., Zadeh, N., Jacob, R., Kirtman, B., Giraldo, F., McCarren, D., Sandgathe, S., Peckham, S., and Dunlap, R. The Earth System Prediction Suite: Toward a Coordinated U.S. Modeling Capability. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00164.1.
Theurich, Gerhard, DeLuca, C., Campbell, T., Liu, F., Saint, K., Vertenstein, M., Chen, J., Oehmke, R., Doyle, J., Whitcomb, T., Wallcraft, A., Iredell, M., Black, T., Da Silva, A. M., Clune, T., Ferraro, R., Li, P., Kelley, M., Aleinov, I., Balaji, V., Zadeh, N., Jacob, R., Kirtman, B., Giraldo, F., McCarren, D., Sandgathe, S., Peckham, S., & Dunlap, R. The Earth System Prediction Suite: Toward a Coordinated U.S. Modeling Capability. United States. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00164.1.
Theurich, Gerhard, DeLuca, C., Campbell, T., Liu, F., Saint, K., Vertenstein, M., Chen, J., Oehmke, R., Doyle, J., Whitcomb, T., Wallcraft, A., Iredell, M., Black, T., Da Silva, A. M., Clune, T., Ferraro, R., Li, P., Kelley, M., Aleinov, I., Balaji, V., Zadeh, N., Jacob, R., Kirtman, B., Giraldo, F., McCarren, D., Sandgathe, S., Peckham, S., and Dunlap, R. Mon . "The Earth System Prediction Suite: Toward a Coordinated U.S. Modeling Capability". United States. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00164.1. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1361021.
@article{osti_1361021,
title = {The Earth System Prediction Suite: Toward a Coordinated U.S. Modeling Capability},
author = {Theurich, Gerhard and DeLuca, C. and Campbell, T. and Liu, F. and Saint, K. and Vertenstein, M. and Chen, J. and Oehmke, R. and Doyle, J. and Whitcomb, T. and Wallcraft, A. and Iredell, M. and Black, T. and Da Silva, A. M. and Clune, T. and Ferraro, R. and Li, P. and Kelley, M. and Aleinov, I. and Balaji, V. and Zadeh, N. and Jacob, R. and Kirtman, B. and Giraldo, F. and McCarren, D. and Sandgathe, S. and Peckham, S. and Dunlap, R.},
abstractNote = {The Earth System Prediction Suite (ESPS) is a collection of flagship U.S. weather and climate models and model components that are being instrumented to conform to interoperability conventions, documented to follow metadata standards, and made available either under open-source terms or to credentialed users. Furthermore, the ESPS represents a culmination of efforts to create a common Earth system model architecture, and the advent of increasingly coordinated model development activities in the United States. ESPS component interfaces are based on the Earth System Modeling Framework (ESMF), community-developed software for building and coupling models, and the National Unified Operational Prediction Capability (NUOPC) Layer, a set of ESMF-based component templates and interoperability conventions. Our shared infrastructure simplifies the process of model coupling by guaranteeing that components conform to a set of technical and semantic behaviors. The ESPS encourages distributed, multiagency development of coupled modeling systems; controlled experimentation and testing; and exploration of novel model configurations, such as those motivated by research involving managed and interactive ensembles. ESPS codes include the Navy Global Environmental Model (NAVGEM), the Hybrid Coordinate Ocean Model (HYCOM), and the Coupled Ocean–Atmosphere Mesoscale Prediction System (COAMPS); the NOAA Environmental Modeling System (NEMS) and the Modular Ocean Model (MOM); the Community Earth System Model (CESM); and the NASA ModelE climate model and the Goddard Earth Observing System Model, version 5 (GEOS-5), atmospheric general circulation model.},
doi = {10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00164.1},
journal = {Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society},
number = 7,
volume = 97,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Aug 22 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Mon Aug 22 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 4works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:
  • Soil carbon (C) is a critical component of Earth system models (ESMs) and its diverse representations are a major source of the large spread across models in the terrestrial C sink from the 3rd to 5th assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Improving soil C projections is of a high priority for Earth system modeling in the future IPCC and other assessments. To achieve this goal, we suggest that (1) model structures should reflect real-world processes, (2) parameters should be calibrated to match model outputs with observations, and (3) external forcing variables should accurately prescribe themore » environmental conditions that soils experience. Firstly, most soil C cycle models simulate C input from litter production and C release through decomposition. The latter process has traditionally been represented by 1st-order decay functions, regulated primarily by temperature, moisture, litter quality, and soil texture. While this formulation well captures macroscopic SOC dynamics, better understanding is needed of their underlying mechanisms as related to microbial processes, depth-dependent environmental controls, and other processes that strongly affect soil C dynamics. Secondly, incomplete use of observations in model parameterization is a major cause of bias in soil C projections from ESMs. Optimal parameter calibration with both pool- and flux-based datasets through data assimilation is among the highest priorities for near-term research to reduce biases among ESMs. Thirdly, external variables are represented inconsistently among ESMs, leading to differences in modeled soil C dynamics. We recommend the implementation of traceability analyses to identify how external variables and model parameterizations influence SOC dynamics in different ESMs. Overall, projections of the terrestrial C sink can be substantially improved when reliable datasets are available to select the most representative model structure, constrain parameters, and prescribe forcing fields.« less
  • Here, one of the most important interactions between humans and climate is in the demand and supply of water. Humans withdraw, use, and consume water and return waste water to the environment for a variety of socioeconomic purposes, including domestic, commercial, and industrial use, production of energy resources and cooling thermal-electric power plants, and growing food, fiber, and chemical feed stocks for human consumption. Uncertainties in the future human demand for water interact with future impacts of climatic change on water supplies to impinge on water management decisions at the international, national, regional, and local level, but until recently toolsmore » were not available to assess the uncertainties surrounding these decisions. This paper demonstrates the use of a multi-model framework in a structured sensitivity analysis to project and quantify the sensitivity of future deficits in surface water in the context of climate and socioeconomic change for all U.S. states and sub-basins. The framework treats all sources of water demand and supply consistently from the world to local level. The paper illustrates the capabilities of the framework with sample results for a river sub-basin in the U.S. state of Georgia.« less
  • Here, one of the most important interactions between humans and climate is in the demand and supply of water. Humans withdraw, use, and consume water and return waste water to the environment for a variety of socioeconomic purposes, including domestic, commercial, and industrial use, production of energy resources and cooling thermal-electric power plants, and growing food, fiber, and chemical feed stocks for human consumption. Uncertainties in the future human demand for water interact with future impacts of climatic change on water supplies to impinge on water management decisions at the international, national, regional, and local level, but until recently toolsmore » were not available to assess the uncertainties surrounding these decisions. This paper demonstrates the use of a multi-model framework in a structured sensitivity analysis to project and quantify the sensitivity of future deficits in surface water in the context of climate and socioeconomic change for all U.S. states and sub-basins. The framework treats all sources of water demand and supply consistently from the world to local level. The paper illustrates the capabilities of the framework with sample results for a river sub-basin in the U.S. state of Georgia.« less
  • This paper uses a suite of Earth system models which simulate the distribution of He isotopes and radiocarbon to examine two paradoxes in Earth science, each of which results from an inconsistency between theoretically motivated global energy balances and direct observations. The helium–heat paradox refers to the fact that helium emissions to the deep ocean are far lower than would be expected given the rate of geothermal heating, since both are thought to be the result of radioactive decay in Earth's interior. The isopycnal mixing paradox comes from the fact that many theoretical parameterizations of the isopycnal mixing coefficient Amore » Redi that link it to baroclinic instability project it to be small (of order a few hundred m 2 s −1) in the ocean interior away from boundary currents. However, direct observations using tracers and floats (largely in the upper ocean) suggest that values of this coefficient are an order of magnitude higher. Helium isotopes equilibrate rapidly with the atmosphere and thus exhibit large gradients along isopycnals while radiocarbon equilibrates slowly and thus exhibits smaller gradients along isopycnals. Thus it might be thought that resolving the isopycnal mixing paradox in favor of the higher observational estimates of A Redi might also solve the helium paradox, by increasing the transport of mantle helium to the surface more than it would radiocarbon. In this paper we show that this is not the case. In a suite of models with different spatially constant and spatially varying values of A Redi the distribution of radiocarbon and helium isotopes is sensitive to the value of A Redi. However, away from strong helium sources in the southeastern Pacific, the relationship between the two is not sensitive, indicating that large-scale advection is the limiting process for removing helium and radiocarbon from the deep ocean. The helium isotopes, in turn, suggest a higher value of A Redi below the thermocline than is seen in theoretical parameterizations based on baroclinic growth rates. We argue that a key part of resolving the isopycnal mixing paradox is to abandon the idea that A Redi has a direct relationship to local baroclinic instability and to the so-called "thickness" mixing coefficient A GM.« less
    Cited by 3