(average ratio is 1.76)
DESCRIPTION
WINTER OROGRAPHIC-PRECIPITATION PATTERNS IN THE SIERRA NEVADA—CLIMATIC UNDERPINNINGS & HYDROLOGIC CONSEQUENCES Mike Dettinger 1 , Kelly Redmond 2 , & Dan Cayan 1 1 U.S. Geological Survey Scripps Institution of Oceanography La Jolla, CA 2 Western Regional Climate Center, DRI, Reno. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
WINTER OROGRAPHIC-PRECIPITATION PATTERNS IN THE SIERRA NEVADA—CLIMATIC UNDERPINNINGS & HYDROLOGIC CONSEQUENCES
Mike Dettinger1, Kelly Redmond2, & Dan Cayan1
1 U.S. Geological SurveyScripps Institution of OceanographyLa Jolla, CA
2 Western Regional Climate Center, DRI, Reno
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
Starting Year
1970 1980 1990 20000.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
Tahoe City / Sacramento Ratio
Ratio of June thru July PrecipitationTahoe City / Sacramento. 1909-10 thru 2000-01.Blue: 7-year running mean.
2001-02 :~1.7 thru Feb
(Average Ratio is 1.76)
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
Starting Year
1970 1980 1990 20000.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
Tahoe City / Sacramento Ratio
Ratio of June thru July PrecipitationTahoe City / Sacramento. 1909-10 thru 2000-01.Blue: 7-year running mean.
2001-02 :~1.7 thru Feb
Why should we care?
Most of our water comes from high altitudes, and yet most of our observations of precip come from low elevations.
Also, the strength of orographic gradients influences runoff timing and the sizes of floods.
Simulated Runoff Responses to Imposed Orograpic Gradients North Fork American River, Sierra Nevada 1983
SimulatedSnowpack Changes with Imposed Orograpic Gradients North Fork American River, Sierra Nevada 1983
Basinwide
High vs low
--> Basinwide snowmelt comes earlier
So, how and why does the ratio of precipitation at low- and high-altitude stations on the west slope of the Sierra Nevada vary?
High-altitude site
Low-altitude site
+/- 10%?925 mb
Surface
850 mb
700 mb
300 mb
+
+
+
Water-vapor transport rates and directions were vertically integrated from surface to 300 mbars each day , 1948-2000, in the NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis products to arrive at a daily transport vector through each grid cell
(assuming linear variation of q, u, & v between levels)
+
+
…
q v dp/g =
Transport vectors provide a focused perspective on storm-time thru seasonal-scale circulations & conditions
(New Years 1997)
Differences between the averages of transports during 180 LARGE-STORM DAYS vs 180 SMALL-STORM DAYS, Dec-Feb 1949-99
L
Differences between the averages of transports during 180 STRONGLY OROGRAPHIC STORMS vs 180 WEAKLY OROGRAPHIC STORMS, Dec-Feb 1949-99
L
14 Low Ratio Winters
Composite
October-March
700 mb Departures
11 High Ratio Winters
No obvious “special” layers or reversals to prohibit vertical averaging, at least in the means.
Locally, orographic storms (winds) blow from somewhat more westerly directions than do “large” storms.
MODE OF OROGRAPHIC STORMS
MODE OF LARGE STORMS
IN MAP VIEW:
Thus, orographic storms are NOT always the largest…
Although, almost by definition, they often are large.
LL
Transport paths significantly associated with El Ninos
La Nina storms are strongly inclined towards “orographic” approaches…
So they provide more of the most strongly orographic storms.
Mean 1.76
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0
June - Nov SOI
-0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
TahoeCity / Sacramento Ratio
Ratio of Tahoe City / Sacramento Precipitation, July thru Juneversus June-November Southern Oscillation Index.1909-1910 thru 2000-2001. N = 68. r = 0.37 (p < .01) Mean 1.76.
7 9
51416
17
Transport paths associated with North Pacific decadal variations
LL
Despite large looking correlations, PDO modifies storm directions and orographic gradients only modestly.
This approach might even be used to project how orographic precipitation would be under global warming scenarios.
e.g., PCM ---> marginally weaker orography
Winds that carries moisture directly across the range yields most precipitation, but orographic influences may require a bit more westerly approaches.
La Ninas (and, perhaps, negative PDOs) may provide slightly more orography as a result.
Other factors being equal, stronger orographic gradients yield later snowmelt & river discharge; weaker gradients threaten larger flood peaks.
CONCLUSIONS
Wet
!
Orographic!