Authors:
Susanna Winkelbauer | University of Vienna (Austria), Department of Meteorology and Geophysics | Austria
Dr. Michael Mayer | University of Vienna (Austria), Department of Meteorology and Geophysics
Ervin Zsoter | European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF)
Hao Zuo | European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF)
Vanessa Seitner | University of Vienna (Austria), Department of Meteorology and Geophysics
Prof. Leopold Haimberger | University of Vienna (Austria), Department of Meteorology and Geophysics
We analyze the Arctic water budget, including its atmospheric, terrestrial, and oceanic components. For this purpose, we use various state-of-the-art reanalyses, including the European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecast's (ECMWF) latest products ERA5 and ERA5-Land as well as ocean data from the CMEMS Global Reanalysis Ensemble Product (GREP) and evaluate them against available satellite (e.g., GRACE) and in-situ river discharge observations. Seasonal cycles and trends of the major water components (i.a., precipitation, evaporation, water vapor flux divergence, river discharge and storage components) are examined for the major Arctic catchments and on a Pan-Arctic scale. Furthermore, we investigate the new Global Flood Awareness System (GloFAS) river discharge reanalysis version 3.1, which combines the hydrological model LISFLOOD with atmospheric forcing from ERA5, and find distinct improvements concerning trends and seasonal peaks in comparison to runoff estimates from other reanalyses.
To obtain a consistent estimate of all physical terms, we combine the most credible estimates of the individual budget terms and perform a variational optimization to obtain closed water budgets on annual and seasonal scales. With this procedure, any budget residuals are distributed across the budget terms according to their relative uncertainties. This provides us with up-to-date monthly and annual estimates of atmospheric, terrestrial and oceanic water fluxes and water storage components. Especially on the annual scale the variational adjustment yields reliable estimates, requiring only moderate adjustments of less than 3% for each individual term. On a seasonal scale however, for some calendar months the adjustment was not possible within the error bounds of the a priori estimates of the individual budget terms, caused primarily by seasonal offsets between surface water input to the ocean (through runoff and precipitation) and oceanic lateral transports in ocean reanalyses.
Furthermore, we use the observationally constrained estimates of the Arctic water cycle to validate seasonal cycles, long term trends, and variabilities of the individual Arctic water cycle terms as simulated by climate models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6).