The Effect of Soil and Vegetation Parameters in the ECMWF Land Surface Scheme

Abstract

Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) and climate models are sensitive to evapotranspiration at the land surface. This sensitivity requires the prediction of realistic surface moisture and heat fluxes by land surface models that provide the lower boundary condition for the atmospheric models. This paper compares simulations of a stand-alone version of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) land surface scheme, or the Viterbo and Beljaars scheme (VB95), with various soil and vegetation parameter sets against soil moisture observations across the Murrumbidgee River catchment in southeast Australia. The study is, in part, motivated by the adoption of VB95 as the operational land surface scheme by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology in 1999. VB95 can model the temporal fluctuations in soil moisture, and therefore the moisture fluxes, fairly realistically. The monthly model latent heat flux is also fairly insensitive to soil or vegetation parameters. The VB95 soil moisture is sensitive to the soil and, to a lesser degree, the vegetation parameters. The model exhibits a significant (generally wet) bias in the absolute soil moisture that varies spatially. The use of the best Australia-wide available soils and vegetation information did not improve VB95 simulations consistently, compared with the original model parameters. Comparisons of model and observed soil moistures revealed that more realistic soil parameters are needed to reduce the model soil moisture bias. Given currently available continent-wide soils parameters, any initialization of soil moisture with observed values would likely result in significant flux errors. The soil moisture bias could be largely eliminated by using soil parameters that were derived directly from the actual soil moisture observations. Such parameters, however, are only available at very few point locations.