A31C-0052
Evaluating Surface Flux Results from CERES-FLASHFlux

Wednesday, 16 December 2015
Poster Hall (Moscone South)
Anne C Wilber, Science Systems and Applications, Inc. Hampton, Hampton, VA, United States
Abstract:
The Fast Longwave and Shortwave Radiative Flux (FLASHFlux) data product was developed to provide a rapid release version of the Clouds and Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) results, which could be made available to the research and applications communities within one week of the satellite observations by exchanging some accuracy for speed of processing. TOA and surface flux products are provided for each CERES footprint (Single Scanner Footprint – SSF) and also time integrated and spatially averaged (TISA) to provide global daily averaged quantities.

Despite the use of the most recently available calibration coefficients and operational inputs that are different from CERES formal climate quality data products, FLASHFlux has been found to provide results that compare very favorably with the CERES results. The TISA results from the FLASHFlux highly parameterized models are compared to the surface fluxes from CERES-EBAF, which uses a radiative transfer model, for the time period when both products are available. The FLASHFlux surface data products also have been found to give accurate surface flux results when compared to ground measurements.

We present validation of both footprint-level and time-space averaged surface fluxes against ground measurements. Validation is done for both longwave (LW) and shortwave (SW) surface fluxes. The surface radiation measurements for land and island sites are collected from multiple networks, including the Baseline Surface Radiation Network (BSRN), Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM). In the US, the NOAA SURFRAD network provides surface flux data products within a day of measurement and these are optimal for FLASHFlux validation. Ocean buoy measurements are from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute (WHOI).

Overall bias for the SSF downward LW flux has been found to be about 6 Wm-2. For SW the bias is about 3 Wm-2. Clear and cloudy sky conditions will be evaluated separately. Validation is also examined by surface type.