4.3 Article

Surface temperature lapse rates over complex terrain: Lessons from the Cascade Mountains

Journal

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2009JD013493

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Park Service Pacific Northwest Ecosystem Studies Unit for deploying iButtons in Mt. Rainier and North Cascades National Parks
  2. NSF [EAR-0838166, EAR-0642835]
  3. Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean under NOAA [NA17RJ1232]
  4. Division Of Earth Sciences
  5. Directorate For Geosciences [0838166] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The typically sparse distribution of weather stations in mountainous terrain inadequately resolves temperature variability. Accordingly, high-resolution gridding of climate data (for applications such as hydrological modeling) often relies on assumptions such as a constant surface temperature lapse rate (i.e., decrease of surface temperature with altitude) of 6.5 degrees C km(-1). Using an example of the Cascade Mountains, we describe the temporal and spatial variability of the surface temperature lapse rate, combining data from: (1) COOP stations, (2) nearby radiosonde launches, (3) a temporary dense network of sensors, (4) forecasts from the MM5 regional model, and (5) PRISM geo-statistical analyses. On the windward side of the range, the various data sources reveal annual mean lapse rates of 3.9-5.2 degrees C km(-1), substantially smaller than the often-assumed 6.5 degrees C km(-1). The data sets show similar seasonal and diurnal variability, with lapse rates smallest (2.5-3.5 degrees C km(-1)) in late-summer minimum temperatures, and largest (6.5-7.5 degrees C km(-1)) in spring maximum temperatures. Geographic (windward versus lee side) differences in lapse rates are found to be substantial. Using a simple runoff model, we show the appreciable implications of these results for hydrological modeling.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available