4.6 Article

Interannual variability in the surface energy budget and evaporation over a large southern inland water in the United States

期刊

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES
卷 118, 期 10, 页码 4290-4302

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50435

关键词

Evaporation; surface energy budget; eddy covariance fluxes

资金

  1. NSF [AGS 1112938]
  2. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences
  3. Directorate For Geosciences [1112938] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding how the surface energy budget and evaporation over inland waters respond to climate change and variability remains limited. Here we report 2 year measurements of the surface energy budget using the eddy covariance method over Ross Barnett Reservoir, Mississippi, USA, for 2008 and 2009. Annual mean sensible (H) and latent (LE) heat fluxes in 2008 were 9.5%, and 10.0% greater than in 2009, respectively. Most of the interannual variations in the surface energy fluxes and meteorological variables primarily occurred in the cool seasons from October to March, which was enhanced by frequent large wind events associated with cold front passages. These large wind events greatly promoted H and LE exchange and produced H and LE pulses that increased variations in H and LE between these two cool seasons. In the warm seasons from April to September, H and LE pulses were also present, which largely increased variations in LE and dampened those in H between the two warm seasons. The H and LE pulses contributed to approximately 50% of the annual H and 28% of the annual LE, although they only covered about 16% of the entire year. The interannual variations in H and LE pulses contributed to about 78% of the interannual variations in H and 40% of those in LE. Our results imply that the increased interannual variability in cold front activities as a result of climate change would amplify interannual variations in the evaporation and the surface energy exchange over inland waters in this region.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据