Standard

Consistent monitoring of global water cycle variability across scales: Where do we stand? / Dorigo, Wouter; Dietrich, Stephan ; Aires, Filipe ; Brocca, Luca; Carter, Sarah ; Cretaux, Jean-François ; Dunkerley, David ; Enomoto, Hiroyuki ; Forsberg, René ; Güntner, Andreas ; Hegglin, Michaela I. ; Hollmann, Rainer ; Hurst, Dale F. ; Johannessen, Johnny A. ; Kummerow, Christian ; Lee, Tong ; Luojus, Kari ; Looser, Ulrich ; Miralles, Diego G. ; Pellet, Victor ; Recknagel, Thomas ; Vargas, Claudia Ruz ; Schneider, Udo; Schoeneich, Philippe ; Schröder, Marc ; Tapper, Nigel ; Vuglinsky, Valery ; Wagner, Wolfgang ; Yu, Lisan ; Zappa, Luca ; Zemp, Michael ; Aich, Valentin .

в: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Том 102, № 10, 10.2021, стр. E1897–E1935.

Результаты исследований: Научные публикации в периодических изданиях › Обзорная статья

Harvard

Dorigo, W, Dietrich, S, Aires, F, Brocca, L, Carter, S, Cretaux, J-F, Dunkerley, D, Enomoto, H, Forsberg, R, Güntner, A, Hegglin, MI, Hollmann, R, Hurst, DF, Johannessen, JA, Kummerow, C, Lee, T, Luojus, K, Looser, U, Miralles, DG, Pellet, V, Recknagel, T, Vargas, CR, Schneider, U, Schoeneich, P, Schröder, M, Tapper, N, Vuglinsky, V, Wagner, W, Yu, L, Zappa, L, Zemp, M & Aich, V 2021, 'Consistent monitoring of global water cycle variability across scales: Where do we stand?', Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Том. 102, № 10, стр. E1897–E1935.

APA

Dorigo, W., Dietrich, S., Aires, F., Brocca, L., Carter, S., Cretaux, J-F., Dunkerley, D., Enomoto, H., Forsberg, R., Güntner, A., Hegglin, M. I., Hollmann, R., Hurst, D. F., Johannessen, J. A., Kummerow, C., Lee, T., Luojus, K., Looser, U., Miralles, D. G., ... Aich, V. (2021). Consistent monitoring of global water cycle variability across scales: Where do we stand? Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 102(10), E1897–E1935.

Vancouver

Dorigo W, Dietrich S, Aires F, Brocca L, Carter S, Cretaux J-F и пр. Consistent monitoring of global water cycle variability across scales: Where do we stand? Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 2021 Окт.;102(10):E1897–E1935.

Author

Dorigo, Wouter ; Dietrich, Stephan ; Aires, Filipe ; Brocca, Luca ; Carter, Sarah ; Cretaux, Jean-François ; Dunkerley, David ; Enomoto, Hiroyuki ; Forsberg, René ; Güntner, Andreas ; Hegglin, Michaela I. ; Hollmann, Rainer ; Hurst, Dale F. ; Johannessen, Johnny A. ; Kummerow, Christian ; Lee, Tong ; Luojus, Kari ; Looser, Ulrich ; Miralles, Diego G. ; Pellet, Victor ; Recknagel, Thomas ; Vargas, Claudia Ruz ; Schneider, Udo ; Schoeneich, Philippe ; Schröder, Marc ; Tapper, Nigel ; Vuglinsky, Valery ; Wagner, Wolfgang ; Yu, Lisan ; Zappa, Luca ; Zemp, Michael ; Aich, Valentin . / Consistent monitoring of global water cycle variability across scales: Where do we stand?. в: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 2021 ; Том 102, № 10. стр. E1897–E1935.

BibTeX

@article{e0c1b1c70c4f4f0b9137fd544727243d,
title = "Consistent monitoring of global water cycle variability across scales: Where do we stand?",
abstract = "Life on Earth vitally depends on the availability of water. Human pressure on freshwater resources is increasing, as is human exposure to weather-related extremes (droughts, storms, floods) caused by climate change. Understanding these changes is pivotal for developing mitigation and adaptation strategies. The Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) defines a suite of essential climate variables (ECVs), many related to the water cycle, required to systematically monitor Earth{\textquoteright}s climate system. Since long-term observations of these ECVs are derived from different observation techniques, platforms, instruments, and retrieval algorithms, they often lack the accuracy, completeness, and resolution, to consistently characterize water cycle variability at multiple spatial and temporal scales. Here, we review the capability of ground-based and remotely sensed observations of water cycle ECVs to consistently observe the hydrological cycle. We evaluate the relevant land, atmosphere, and ocean water storages and the fluxes between them, including anthropogenic water use. Particularly, we assess how well they close on multiple temporal and spatial scales. On this basis, we discuss gaps in observation systems and formulate guidelines for future water cycle observation strategies. We conclude that, while long-term water cycle monitoring has greatly advanced in the past, many observational gaps still need to be overcome to close the water budget and enable a comprehensive and consistent assessment across scales. Trends in water cycle components can only be observed with great uncertainty, mainly due to insufficient length and homogeneity. An advanced closure of the water cycle requires improved model–data synthesis capabilities, particularly at regional to local scales.",
keywords = "Hydrologic cycle, satellite observations, Surface fluxes, Surface observations, Water masses/storage, Water budget/balance",
author = "Wouter Dorigo and Stephan Dietrich and Filipe Aires and Luca Brocca and Sarah Carter and Jean-Fran{\c c}ois Cretaux and David Dunkerley and Hiroyuki Enomoto and Ren{\'e} Forsberg and Andreas G{\"u}ntner and Hegglin, {Michaela I.} and Rainer Hollmann and Hurst, {Dale F.} and Johannessen, {Johnny A.} and Christian Kummerow and Tong Lee and Kari Luojus and Ulrich Looser and Miralles, {Diego G.} and Victor Pellet and Thomas Recknagel and Vargas, {Claudia Ruz} and Udo Schneider and Philippe Schoeneich and Marc Schr{\"o}der and Nigel Tapper and Valery Vuglinsky and Wolfgang Wagner and Lisan Yu and Luca Zappa and Michael Zemp and Valentin Aich",
note = "Valery Vuglinsky and others. Consistent monitoring of global water cycle variability across scales: Where do we stand? Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2021 (in print). ",
year = "2021",
month = oct,
language = "English",
volume = "102",
pages = "E1897–E1935",
journal = "Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society",
issn = "0003-0007",
publisher = "American Meteorological Society",
number = "10",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Consistent monitoring of global water cycle variability across scales: Where do we stand?

AU - Dorigo, Wouter

AU - Dietrich, Stephan

AU - Aires, Filipe

AU - Brocca, Luca

AU - Carter, Sarah

AU - Cretaux, Jean-François

AU - Dunkerley, David

AU - Enomoto, Hiroyuki

AU - Forsberg, René

AU - Güntner, Andreas

AU - Hegglin, Michaela I.

AU - Hollmann, Rainer

AU - Hurst, Dale F.

AU - Johannessen, Johnny A.

AU - Kummerow, Christian

AU - Lee, Tong

AU - Luojus, Kari

AU - Looser, Ulrich

AU - Miralles, Diego G.

AU - Pellet, Victor

AU - Recknagel, Thomas

AU - Vargas, Claudia Ruz

AU - Schneider, Udo

AU - Schoeneich, Philippe

AU - Schröder, Marc

AU - Tapper, Nigel

AU - Vuglinsky, Valery

AU - Wagner, Wolfgang

AU - Yu, Lisan

AU - Zappa, Luca

AU - Zemp, Michael

AU - Aich, Valentin

N1 - Valery Vuglinsky and others. Consistent monitoring of global water cycle variability across scales: Where do we stand? Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2021 (in print).

PY - 2021/10

Y1 - 2021/10

N2 - Life on Earth vitally depends on the availability of water. Human pressure on freshwater resources is increasing, as is human exposure to weather-related extremes (droughts, storms, floods) caused by climate change. Understanding these changes is pivotal for developing mitigation and adaptation strategies. The Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) defines a suite of essential climate variables (ECVs), many related to the water cycle, required to systematically monitor Earth’s climate system. Since long-term observations of these ECVs are derived from different observation techniques, platforms, instruments, and retrieval algorithms, they often lack the accuracy, completeness, and resolution, to consistently characterize water cycle variability at multiple spatial and temporal scales. Here, we review the capability of ground-based and remotely sensed observations of water cycle ECVs to consistently observe the hydrological cycle. We evaluate the relevant land, atmosphere, and ocean water storages and the fluxes between them, including anthropogenic water use. Particularly, we assess how well they close on multiple temporal and spatial scales. On this basis, we discuss gaps in observation systems and formulate guidelines for future water cycle observation strategies. We conclude that, while long-term water cycle monitoring has greatly advanced in the past, many observational gaps still need to be overcome to close the water budget and enable a comprehensive and consistent assessment across scales. Trends in water cycle components can only be observed with great uncertainty, mainly due to insufficient length and homogeneity. An advanced closure of the water cycle requires improved model–data synthesis capabilities, particularly at regional to local scales.

AB - Life on Earth vitally depends on the availability of water. Human pressure on freshwater resources is increasing, as is human exposure to weather-related extremes (droughts, storms, floods) caused by climate change. Understanding these changes is pivotal for developing mitigation and adaptation strategies. The Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) defines a suite of essential climate variables (ECVs), many related to the water cycle, required to systematically monitor Earth’s climate system. Since long-term observations of these ECVs are derived from different observation techniques, platforms, instruments, and retrieval algorithms, they often lack the accuracy, completeness, and resolution, to consistently characterize water cycle variability at multiple spatial and temporal scales. Here, we review the capability of ground-based and remotely sensed observations of water cycle ECVs to consistently observe the hydrological cycle. We evaluate the relevant land, atmosphere, and ocean water storages and the fluxes between them, including anthropogenic water use. Particularly, we assess how well they close on multiple temporal and spatial scales. On this basis, we discuss gaps in observation systems and formulate guidelines for future water cycle observation strategies. We conclude that, while long-term water cycle monitoring has greatly advanced in the past, many observational gaps still need to be overcome to close the water budget and enable a comprehensive and consistent assessment across scales. Trends in water cycle components can only be observed with great uncertainty, mainly due to insufficient length and homogeneity. An advanced closure of the water cycle requires improved model–data synthesis capabilities, particularly at regional to local scales.

KW - Hydrologic cycle

KW - satellite observations

KW - Surface fluxes

KW - Surface observations

KW - Water masses/storage

KW - Water budget/balance

UR - https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/102/10/BAMS-D-19-0316.1.xml

M3 - Review article

VL - 102

SP - E1897–E1935

JO - Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

JF - Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

SN - 0003-0007

IS - 10

ER -

ID: 73462813