Howard W. Barker
Environment Canada
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Howard W. Barker.
Monthly Weather Review | 2008
J-J. Morcrette; Howard W. Barker; Jason N. S. Cole; Michael J. Iacono; Robert Pincus
Abstract A new radiation package, “McRad,” has become operational with cycle 32R2 of the Integrated Forecasting System (IFS) of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF). McRad includes an improved description of the land surface albedo from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) observations, the Monte Carlo independent column approximation treatment of the radiative transfer in clouds, and the Rapid Radiative Transfer Model shortwave scheme. The impact of McRad on year-long simulations at TL159L91 and higher-resolution 10-day forecasts is then documented. McRad is shown to benefit the representation of most parameters over both shorter and longer time scales, relative to the previous operational version of the radiative transfer schemes. At all resolutions, McRad improves the representation of the cloud–radiation interactions, particularly in the tropical regions, with improved temperature and wind objective scores through a reduction of some systematic errors in the ...
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences | 1996
Howard W. Barker; Bruce A. Wiellicki; Lindsay Parker
Abstract The Independent Pixel approximation (IPA) is one of the simplest methods of computing solar radiative fluxes for inhomogencous clouds. It claims that if p(τ) is a normalized probability density function for cloud optical depth τ and Rpp(τ) is plane-parallel, homogeneous (PPH) albedo, mean cloud albedo can be approximated by integrating p(τ)Rpp(τ) over all τ. The purpose of this study is to assess the ability of the gamma distribution function to represent p(τ) for marine boundary layer clouds and to examine the accuracy of the ensuing gamma IPA albedos. In a separate study, pixel values of τ were inferred from high spatial resolution Landsat imagery of marine boundary layer clouds. The present study utilizes 45 images, each measuring (58 km)2. For each image, a density function pobs(τ) is estimated, and, using the mean τ¯ and variance of τ, a corresponding truncated gamma distribution function pγ(τ) is defined. For a diverse range of clouds, pγ(τ) usually approximate pobs(τ) well. The best result...
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society | 2005
Robert F. Cahalan; Lazaros Oreopoulos; A. Marshak; K. F. Evans; Anthony B. Davis; Robert Pincus; K. H. Yetzer; Bernhard Mayer; Roger Davies; Thomas P. Ackerman; Howard W. Barker; Eugene E. Clothiaux; Robert G. Ellingson; Michael J. Garay; Evgueni I. Kassianov; Stefan Kinne; Andreas Macke; William O'Hirok; Philip T. Partain; Sergei M. Prigarin; Alexei N. Rublev; Graeme L. Stephens; Frédéric Szczap; Ezra E. Takara; Tamás Várnai; Guoyong Wen; Tatiana B. Zhuravleva
The interaction of clouds with solar and terrestrial radiation is one of the most important topics of climate research. In recent years it has been recognized that only a full three-dimensional (3D) treatment of this interaction can provide answers to many climate and remote sensing problems, leading to the worldwide development of numerous 3D radiative transfer (RT) codes. The international Intercomparison of 3D Radiation Codes (I3RC), described in this paper, sprung from the natural need to compare the performance of these 3D RT codes used in a variety of current scientific work in the atmospheric sciences. I3RC supports intercomparison and development of both exact and approximate 3D methods in its effort to 1) understand and document the errors/limits of 3D algorithms and their sources; 2) provide “baseline” cases for future code development for 3D radiation; 3) promote sharing and production of 3D radiative tools; 4) derive guidelines for 3D radiative tool selection; and 5) improve atmospheric science education in 3D RT. Results from the two completed phases of I3RC have been presented in two workshops and are expected to guide improvements in both remote sensing and radiative energy budget calculations in cloudy atmospheres.
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society | 2015
Anthony J. Illingworth; Howard W. Barker; Anton Beljaars; Marie Ceccaldi; H. Chepfer; Nicolas Clerbaux; Jason N. S. Cole; Julien Delanoë; Carlos Domenech; David P. Donovan; S. Fukuda; Maki Hirakata; Robin J. Hogan; A. Huenerbein; Pavlos Kollias; Takuji Kubota; Teruyuki Nakajima; Takashi Y. Nakajima; Tomoaki Nishizawa; Yuichi Ohno; Hajime Okamoto; Riko Oki; Kaori Sato; Masaki Satoh; Mark W. Shephard; A. Velázquez-Blázquez; Ulla Wandinger; Tobias Wehr; G.-J. van Zadelhoff
AbstractThe collective representation within global models of aerosol, cloud, precipitation, and their radiative properties remains unsatisfactory. They constitute the largest source of uncertainty in predictions of climatic change and hamper the ability of numerical weather prediction models to forecast high-impact weather events. The joint European Space Agency (ESA)–Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) Earth Clouds, Aerosol and Radiation Explorer (EarthCARE) satellite mission, scheduled for launch in 2018, will help to resolve these weaknesses by providing global profiles of cloud, aerosol, precipitation, and associated radiative properties inferred from a combination of measurements made by its collocated active and passive sensors. EarthCARE will improve our understanding of cloud and aerosol processes by extending the invaluable dataset acquired by the A-Train satellites CloudSat, Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO), and Aqua. Specifically, EarthCARE’s c...
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences | 1996
Howard W. Barker
Abstract A method of computing grid-averaged solar radiative fluxes for horizontally inhomogeneous marine boundary layer cloud fields is presented. Its underlying assumptions are as follows: i) the independent pixel approximation (IPA) is applicable and ii) for regions the size of general circulation model (GCM) grid cells, frequency distributions of cloud optical depth τ can be approximated by gamma distribution functions. Equations are furnished for albedo and transmittance that, when applied to judiciously chosen spectral bands, require about three to four times as much CPU time as plane-parallel, homogeneous (PPH) two-stream approximations, which are ubiquitous to GCMs. This is not a hindrance, as two-stream solutions command typically less than 1% of a GCMs CPU consumption. This method, referred to as the gamma IPA, requires estimates of the mean and variance of τ for each applicable grid cell. Biases associated with PPH models are assessed assuming that cloud properties in GCMs are tuned to yield a...
Journal of Climate | 2003
Howard W. Barker; Graeme L. Stephens; P. T. Partain; J. W. Bergman; B. Bonnel; Kenneth A. Campana; Eugene E. Clothiaux; Shepard A. Clough; S. Cusack; Jennifer Delamere; John M. Edwards; K. F. Evans; Y. Fouquart; Stuart M. Freidenreich; V. Galin; Yu-Tai Hou; Seiji Kato; Jiangnan Li; Eli Mlawer; J.-J. Morcrette; W. O'Hirok; P. Räisänen; V. Ramaswamy; B. Ritter; Eugene Rozanov; Michael E. Schlesinger; K. Shibata; P. Sporyshev; Z. Sun; Manfred Wendisch
Abstract The primary purpose of this study is to assess the performance of 1D solar radiative transfer codes that are used currently both for research and in weather and climate models. Emphasis is on interpretation and handling of unresolved clouds. Answers are sought to the following questions: (i) How well do 1D solar codes interpret and handle columns of information pertaining to partly cloudy atmospheres? (ii) Regardless of the adequacy of their assumptions about unresolved clouds, do 1D solar codes perform as intended? One clear-sky and two plane-parallel, homogeneous (PPH) overcast cloud cases serve to elucidate 1D model differences due to varying treatments of gaseous transmittances, cloud optical properties, and basic radiative transfer. The remaining four cases involve 3D distributions of cloud water and water vapor as simulated by cloud-resolving models. Results for 25 1D codes, which included two line-by-line (LBL) models (clear and overcast only) and four 3D Monte Carlo (MC) photon transport ...
Science | 1993
Robert D. Cess; Minghua Zhang; Gerald L. Potter; Howard W. Barker; R. A. Colman; D. A. Dazlich; A. D. Del Genio; Monika Esch; J. R. Fraser; V. Galin; W. L. Gates; James J. Hack; William Ingram; Jeffrey T. Kiehl; A. Lacis; H. Le Treut; Zhongxian Li; Xin-Zhong Liang; J. F. Mahfouf; B. J. McAvaney; V. P. Meleshko; J.-J. Morcrette; David A. Randall; Erich Roeckner; J.-F. Royer; A. P. Sokolov; P. V. Sporyshev; Karl E. Taylor; Wei-Chyung Wang; R. T. Wetherald
Global warming caused by an increase in the concentrations of greenhouse gases, is the direct result of greenhouse gas—induced radiative forcing. When a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide is considered, this forcing differed substantially among 15 atmospheric general circulation models. Although there are several potential causes, the largest contributor was the carbon dioxide radiation parameterizations of the models.
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences | 1992
Howard W. Barker; J.A. Davies
Abstract Solar radiative fluxes for broken, cumuloform cloud fields are examined from the point of view of subgrid parameterization for general circulation models (GCMs). A simple stochastic scaling model is used to simulate extensive broken cloud fields having horizontal variation of optical depth τ characterized by power-law wave-number spectra and power-law area/perimeter and cloud-size distribution properties. Fluxes are computed with the Monte Carlo method of photon transport. Accurate flux estimates for extensive cloud fields are attainable with as few as 50 000 photons/simulation. Radiative fluxes for individual realizations of the cloud model represent the population well. Also, the effect of anisotropic scaling on azimuthally averaged fluxes may often be minimal. The latter two points are beneficial for flux parameterization purposes. Solar fluxes for various scaling, regular, and plane-parallel broken cloud fields are compared. Scaling cloud fields the size of GCM grid boxes often produce signif...
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences | 2000
Qiang Fu; M. C. Cribb; Howard W. Barker; Steven K. Krueger; A. Grossman
A 3D broadband solar radiative transfer scheme is formulated by integrating a Monte Carlo photon transport algorithm with the Fu‐Liou radiation model. It is applied to fields of tropical mesoscale convective clouds and subtropical marine boundary layer clouds that were generated by a 2D cloud-resolving model. The effects of cloud geometry on the radiative energy budget are examined by comparing the full-resolution Monte Carlo results with those from the independent column approximation (ICA) that applies the plane-parallel radiation model to each column. For the tropical convective cloud system, it is found that cloud geometry effects always enhance atmospheric solar absorption regardless of solar zenith angle. In a large horizontal domain (512 km), differences in domainaveraged atmospheric absorption between the Monte Carlo and the ICA are less tha n4Wm 22 in the daytime. However, for a smaller domain (e.g., 75 km) containing a cluster of deep convective towers, domain-averaged absorption can be enhanced by more than 20 W m22. For a subtropical marine boundary layer cloud system during the stratus-to-cumulus transition, calculations show that the ICA works very well for domain-averaged fluxes of the stratocumulus cloud fields even for a very small domain (4.8 km). For the trade cumulus cloud field, the effects of cloud sides and horizontal transport of photons become more significant. Calculations have also been made for both cloud systems including black carbon aerosol and a water vapor continuum. It is found that cloud geometry produces no discernible effects on the absorption enhancement due to the black carbon aerosol and water vapor continuum. The current study indicates that the atmospheric absorption enhancement due to cloud-related 3D photon transport is small. This enhancement could not explain the excess absorption suggested by recent studies.
Journal of Geophysical Research | 1997
Robert D. Cess; Minghua Zhang; Gerald L. Potter; V. Alekseev; Howard W. Barker; Sandrine Bony; R. A. Colman; D. A. Dazlich; A. D. Del Genio; Michel Déqué; M. R. Dix; V. Dymnikov; Monika Esch; Laura D. Fowler; J. R. Fraser; V. Galin; W. L. Gates; James J. Hack; William Ingram; Jeffrey T. Kiehl; Y. Kim; H. Le Treut; X.-Z. Liang; B. J. McAvaney; V. P. Meleshko; J.-J. Morcrette; David A. Randall; Erich Roeckner; Michael E. Schlesinger; P. V. Sporyshev
We compare seasonal changes in cloud-radiative forcing (CRF) at the top of the atmosphere from 18 atmospheric general circulation models, and observations from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE). To enhance the CRF signal and suppress interannual variability, we consider only zonal mean quantities for which the extreme months (January and July), as well as the northern and southern hemispheres, have been differenced. Since seasonal variations of the shortwave component of CRF are caused by seasonal changes in both cloudiness and solar irradiance, the latter was removed. In the ERBE data, seasonal changes in CRF are driven primarily by changes in cloud amount. The same conclusion applies to the models. The shortwave component of seasonal CRF is a measure of changes in cloud amount at all altitudes, while the longwave component is more a measure of upper level clouds. Thus important insights into seasonal cloud amount variations of the models have been obtained by comparing both components, as generated by the models, with the satellite data. For example, in 10 of the 18 models the seasonal oscillations of zonal cloud patterns extend too far poleward by one latitudinal grid. •Institute for Terrestrial and Planetary Atmospheres, Marine Sciences Research Center, State University of New York at Stony Brook. 2program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California. 3Department of Numerical Mathematics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow. 4Canadian Climate Centre, Downsview, Ontario. SLaboratoire de Mdtdorologie Dynamique, Paris. 6Bureau of Meteorology Research Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 7Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins. 8NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York. 9Maltrio-France, Centre National de Recherches Mdtdorologiques, Toulouse, France. •oDivision of Atmospheric Research, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Aspendale, Victoria, Australia. •Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany. •2National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado. •3Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, U. K. Meteorological Office, Bracknell, England. •4Atmospheric Sciences Research Center, State University of New York at Albany. •SVoeikov Main Geophysical Obseratory, St. Petersburg, Russia. •6European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, England. •7Department ofAtmospheric Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana. 18Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey. Copyright 1997 by the American Geophysical Union. Paper number 97JD00927. 01480227/97/97JD-00927509.00
Collaboration
Dive into the Howard W. Barker's collaboration.
Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences
View shared research outputs