SSP CO2 pathways in src_radiation – in #9: CCLM

in #9: CCLM

<p> Hello, <br/> I’m trying to setup a simulation with ssp370 forcing with cclm5_clm16. For the ico2_rad switch there are only 0-10 options with <span class="caps"> SRES </span> and <span class="caps"> RCP </span> scenarios. Is there an update for the src_radiation.f90 with the new <span class="caps"> SSP </span> Scenarios for the zqco2 variable from line 1812-1909. Has someone already done that or is it planned? Or is choosing rcp6.0 ok for that? </p> <p> Greetings Lukas </p>

  @lukasschefczyk in #40b05a8

<p> Hello, <br/> I’m trying to setup a simulation with ssp370 forcing with cclm5_clm16. For the ico2_rad switch there are only 0-10 options with <span class="caps"> SRES </span> and <span class="caps"> RCP </span> scenarios. Is there an update for the src_radiation.f90 with the new <span class="caps"> SSP </span> Scenarios for the zqco2 variable from line 1812-1909. Has someone already done that or is it planned? Or is choosing rcp6.0 ok for that? </p> <p> Greetings Lukas </p>

SSP CO2 pathways in src_radiation

LS wrote

Hello,
I’m trying to setup a simulation with ssp370 forcing with cclm5_clm16. For the ico2_rad switch there are only 0-10 options with SRES and RCP scenarios. Is there an update for the src_radiation.f90 with the new SSP Scenarios for the zqco2 variable from line 1812-1909. Has someone already done that or is it planned? Or is choosing rcp6.0 ok for that?

Greetings Lukas

View in channel
<p> Hello Lukas, </p> <p> <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> got an update related to <span class="caps"> SRES </span> scenarios. You cannot use it in combination with COSMOv5-clm16, but I immediately asked the source code administration to publish a clm17 Version to get rid of that problem. We will contact you in today or tomorrow. </p> <p> Best regards <br/> Ronny </p>

  @ronnypetrik in #19d2de1

<p> Hello Lukas, </p> <p> <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> got an update related to <span class="caps"> SRES </span> scenarios. You cannot use it in combination with COSMOv5-clm16, but I immediately asked the source code administration to publish a clm17 Version to get rid of that problem. We will contact you in today or tomorrow. </p> <p> Best regards <br/> Ronny </p>
RP replied

Hello Lukas,

COSMO got an update related to SRES scenarios. You cannot use it in combination with COSMOv5-clm16, but I immediately asked the source code administration to publish a clm17 Version to get rid of that problem. We will contact you in today or tomorrow.

Best regards
Ronny

View in channel
<p> Hello Ronny, <br/> Thanks for the quick response! <br/> Is there an update regarding the new version ? </p> <p> Greetings Lukas </p>

  @lukasschefczyk in #bfcba19

<p> Hello Ronny, <br/> Thanks for the quick response! <br/> Is there an update regarding the new version ? </p> <p> Greetings Lukas </p>
LS replied

Hello Ronny,
Thanks for the quick response!
Is there an update regarding the new version ?

Greetings Lukas

View in channel
<p> Hello Lukas, </p> <p> the new pathways are part of COSMO6.0 which is in the pipline at the German Weather Service. </p> <p> However, a quicker way is to adapt the most recent COSMO5-clm15 for the pathways. This can be easily done by merging the source code file ‘src/radiation_utilities.f90’ from version 5.10 with the most recent COSMO5- <span class="caps"> CLM </span> version and testing the changes. Then, a new COSMO5-clm16 version can be released in cooperation with Burkhardt Rockel. You will receive the <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> 5.10 version of the ‘src/radiation_utilities.f90’ from Ulrich Schättler ( <span class="caps"> DWD </span> ). </p> <p> Greetings <br/> Ronny </p>

  @ronnypetrik in #f151930

<p> Hello Lukas, </p> <p> the new pathways are part of COSMO6.0 which is in the pipline at the German Weather Service. </p> <p> However, a quicker way is to adapt the most recent COSMO5-clm15 for the pathways. This can be easily done by merging the source code file ‘src/radiation_utilities.f90’ from version 5.10 with the most recent COSMO5- <span class="caps"> CLM </span> version and testing the changes. Then, a new COSMO5-clm16 version can be released in cooperation with Burkhardt Rockel. You will receive the <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> 5.10 version of the ‘src/radiation_utilities.f90’ from Ulrich Schättler ( <span class="caps"> DWD </span> ). </p> <p> Greetings <br/> Ronny </p>
RP replied

Hello Lukas,

the new pathways are part of COSMO6.0 which is in the pipline at the German Weather Service.

However, a quicker way is to adapt the most recent COSMO5-clm15 for the pathways. This can be easily done by merging the source code file ‘src/radiation_utilities.f90’ from version 5.10 with the most recent COSMO5- CLM version and testing the changes. Then, a new COSMO5-clm16 version can be released in cooperation with Burkhardt Rockel. You will receive the COSMO 5.10 version of the ‘src/radiation_utilities.f90’ from Ulrich Schättler ( DWD ).

Greetings
Ronny

View in channel
<p> Hi Ronny, </p> <p> I will also run <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> <span class="caps"> SSP </span> simulations. Would it be possible to share the <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> 5.10 version of the ‘src/radiation_utilities.f90’ file? </p> <p> Kind Regards, </p> <p> Paul. </p>

  @paulnolan in #47e4075

<p> Hi Ronny, </p> <p> I will also run <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> <span class="caps"> SSP </span> simulations. Would it be possible to share the <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> 5.10 version of the ‘src/radiation_utilities.f90’ file? </p> <p> Kind Regards, </p> <p> Paul. </p>
PN replied

Hi Ronny,

I will also run COSMO - CLM SSP simulations. Would it be possible to share the COSMO 5.10 version of the ‘src/radiation_utilities.f90’ file?

Kind Regards,

Paul.

View in channel
<p> Hello to both of you (Paul and Lukas), </p> <p> I have sent the file with new <span class="caps"> SRES </span> scenarios to Hendrik Feldmann at <span class="caps"> KIT </span> . He is now merging the old code with the new scenarios. You should ask him how far they get with the implementation. I will ask him too. </p> <p> Best regards, <br/> Ronny Petrik </p>

  @ronnypetrik in #3d554da

<p> Hello to both of you (Paul and Lukas), </p> <p> I have sent the file with new <span class="caps"> SRES </span> scenarios to Hendrik Feldmann at <span class="caps"> KIT </span> . He is now merging the old code with the new scenarios. You should ask him how far they get with the implementation. I will ask him too. </p> <p> Best regards, <br/> Ronny Petrik </p>
RP replied

Hello to both of you (Paul and Lukas),

I have sent the file with new SRES scenarios to Hendrik Feldmann at KIT . He is now merging the old code with the new scenarios. You should ask him how far they get with the implementation. I will ask him too.

Best regards,
Ronny Petrik

View in channel
<p> Hello all, <br/> I saw the email about implementing the new ico2_rad in clm17. I tried to plot the functions of zgco2 for RCP8.5 and SSP858, and here in the figure is what I found. <br/> I am wondering why the differ in the historical period (1950-2005), although they usually are compared after 2005 (such as in O’Neill et al. (2016) figure 3), which means they shouldn’t differ in the historical period. </p> <p> <img alt="" src="https://i.ibb.co/1dwZcpQ/CO2PPM.jpg"/> </p> <p> Best regards, <br/> Mostafa </p>

  @mostafahamouda in #45313f4

<p> Hello all, <br/> I saw the email about implementing the new ico2_rad in clm17. I tried to plot the functions of zgco2 for RCP8.5 and SSP858, and here in the figure is what I found. <br/> I am wondering why the differ in the historical period (1950-2005), although they usually are compared after 2005 (such as in O’Neill et al. (2016) figure 3), which means they shouldn’t differ in the historical period. </p> <p> <img alt="" src="https://i.ibb.co/1dwZcpQ/CO2PPM.jpg"/> </p> <p> Best regards, <br/> Mostafa </p>
MH replied

Hello all,
I saw the email about implementing the new ico2_rad in clm17. I tried to plot the functions of zgco2 for RCP8.5 and SSP858, and here in the figure is what I found.
I am wondering why the differ in the historical period (1950-2005), although they usually are compared after 2005 (such as in O’Neill et al. (2016) figure 3), which means they shouldn’t differ in the historical period.

Best regards,
Mostafa

View in channel
<p> Thank you Ronny &amp; Hendrik. </p> <p> I am now using the latest <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> release. </p> <p> Kind Regards, </p> <p> Paul. </p> <p> user#270 wrote: <br/> &gt; Hello to both of you (Paul and Lukas), <br/> &gt; <br/> &gt; I have sent the file with new SRES scenarios to Hendrik Feldmann at KIT. He is now merging the old code with the new scenarios. You should ask him how far they get with the implementation. I will ask him too. <br/> &gt; <br/> &gt; Best regards, <br/> &gt; Ronny Petrik </p>

  @paulnolan in #48c3349

<p> Thank you Ronny &amp; Hendrik. </p> <p> I am now using the latest <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> release. </p> <p> Kind Regards, </p> <p> Paul. </p> <p> user#270 wrote: <br/> &gt; Hello to both of you (Paul and Lukas), <br/> &gt; <br/> &gt; I have sent the file with new SRES scenarios to Hendrik Feldmann at KIT. He is now merging the old code with the new scenarios. You should ask him how far they get with the implementation. I will ask him too. <br/> &gt; <br/> &gt; Best regards, <br/> &gt; Ronny Petrik </p>
PN replied

Thank you Ronny & Hendrik.

I am now using the latest COSMO - CLM release.

Kind Regards,

Paul.

user#270 wrote:
> Hello to both of you (Paul and Lukas),
>
> I have sent the file with new SRES scenarios to Hendrik Feldmann at KIT. He is now merging the old code with the new scenarios. You should ask him how far they get with the implementation. I will ask him too.
>
> Best regards,
> Ronny Petrik

View in channel