Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of Documentation/FrenchConfiguration


Ignore:
Timestamp:
12/22/20 17:02:21 (12 months ago)
Author:
luyssaert
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Documentation/FrenchConfiguration

    v1 v2  
    11=== Description of the French configuration === 
     2The French configuration(s) 
     3 
     4ORCHIDEE 
     5Vegetation discretization 
     6Land cover change map 
     7Climate forcing 
     8Soil map 
     9Management 
     10River basins 
     11Restart 
     12Parameter files 
     13 
     14 
     15 
     16 
     171 sinup 
     181 exp 
     192 spinup 
     202 exp 
     213 spin 
     223 exp 
     23ORCHIDEE 
     244.x 
     254.x 
     262.x, 3.x 
     272.x, 3.x 
     28 
     29 
     30 
     31 
     32Vegetation discretization 
     33NFI - tree species 
     34NFI - tree species 
     35 
     36 
     37CMIP6+census 
     38C3 & C4 crops or more details? 
     39 
     40 
     41 
     42 
     43Land cover change map 
     44Past only 
     45 
     46 
     47- 
     48 
     49 
     50Future only 
     51 
     52 
     53 
     54 
     55Climate forcing 
     56SAFRAN 
     57SAFRAN 
     58 
     59 
     60SAFRAN 
     61 
     62 
     63 
     64 
     65Soil map 
     66INRAE 
     67INRAE 
     68 
     69 
     70Reynolds INRAE 
     71 
     72 
     73 
     74 
     75Management 
     76NFI 
     77NFI 
     78 
     79 
     80irrigation 
     81 
     82 
     83 
     84 
     85River basins 
     86Not working yet at this resolution 
     87Not working yet at this resolution 
     88Not working yet at this resolution 
     89Not working yet at this resolution 
     90 
     91 
     92 
     93 
     94Restart 
     95- 
     96Own spinup 
     97 
     98 
     99Own spinup 
     100 
     101 
     102 
     103 
     104Parameter files 
     105Species level 
     106Species level 
     107 
     108 
     109 
     110 
     111 
     112 
     113 
     114 
     115 
     116To do: 
     117GM: Ask Nicolas Viovy whether his files are for his driver or standard driver. 
     118PP: Prepare SAFRAN for 2.1new driver (Philippe will ask Vlad for scripts/insights). Make sure it is compatible with the current and new driver.  
     119GM: Ask Miriam (ADEME) or Infosoil INRAE (Orleans) about the French soil map they want us to use. How to get the map? Texture map? Carbon content? Soil water holding capacity? 
     120AD: High resolution basin information needs to be prepared (this is already on Agnes’s to do list). Conversion from lambert-projection to lat/lon. 
     121PP: CITEPA ask for their land cover map. 
     122SL: start wiki (methods & materials) 
     123         
     124      
     125 
     126For the time being we could store high resolution run-off information through the history files. Run-off could be calculated in post-processing. 
     127 
     128 
     1291. Projects: ADEME and Marie Curie of Guillaume Marie 
     130Nicolas Vuichard, Jina Jeong, Guillaume Marie and Sebastiaan Luyssaert 
     131 
     132The ADEME project has a focus on France and the MSC a focus on Europe. The projects study the impact of natural disturbances and forest management on the future forest health. 
     133 
     134Configuration spinup 
     135ORCHIDEE 4.x: sechiba, stomate and sapiens 
     136Vegetation discretization: tree species level, three diameter classes and three or four age classes 
     137Restart: none 
     138Land cover change map: to be created based on the NFI age distribution map, NFI species distribution map, and the LUHv2 or another LCC product. 
     139Climate forcing: medium resolution (~ 8x8 km) no other specific requirements. Currently looking into SAFRAN data 1986 to 2018. 
     140Soil map: if available the soil map from a previous ADEME project. If not any soil map could do. 
     141Forest management map: for the year 2010 (default or based on NFI) 
     142 
     143Configuration transient 
     144Included in the spinup thanks to a dedicated land cover change map 
     145 
     146Configuration simulation experiments 
     147ORCHIDEE 4.x: sechiba, stomate and sapiens 
     148Restart:  from spinup  
     149Land cover change map: none 
     150PFT map: based in NFI data (last map of the Land cover change maps that need to be prepared for the spinup) 
     151Climate forcing: downscaled AR5. medium resolution (~ 8x8 km). We will have an inconsistency between the spinup and the future simulations no matter which forcing we use. 
     152Soil map: if available the soil map from a previous ADEME project. If not any soil map could do. 
     153Species change maps: based on the scenarios France (this is part of the simulation experiment) 
     154Management change maps: based on the scenarios France (this is part of the simulation experiment) 
     155 
     156Tree-ring simulations for Fontainebleau and Paris  
     157(Jonathan, Jina, Sebastiaan, Philippe, Valerie) 
     158Site-level simulations for PFT4 and PFT6 (PFT refination for oak possibly)  
     159ORCHIDEE 4.x: sechiba, stomate 
     160 
     161 
     1622. Projects: Services climatiques IPSL, Explore2 (MTES), BLUEGEM if funded by Belmont Forum  
     163Agnès Ducharne, Jan Polcher, Frédérique Chéruy, Philippe Peylin, Bertrand Guenet, Philippe Ciais 
     164 
     165All three projects have a focus on water resources and their response to climate change and anthropogenic pressures, especially from the agricultural sector. 
     166 
     167Configuration simulation experiments 
     168ORCHIDEE 2.x (3.x foreseen in a second step with Nicolas Vuichard): sechiba, stomate with HR routing, GWF, and irrigation 
     169Restart:  from spinup  
     170PFT map: first step with CMIP6 maps, and attempts to use French agricultural census 
     171Land cover change: yes, using standard CMIP6 maps 
     172Climate forcing: SAFRAN (~ 8x8 km) + downscaled bias-corrected climate projections from other partners of the projects ; CORDEX output 
     173Soil map: first step with Reynolds, but tests with the INRA soil map  
     174Management change maps: for agriculture and irrigation, using standard CMIP6 maps (LUHv2), and tailored irrigation  
     175Model calibration : with ORCHIDAS over the historical period, to match hydrological observations 
     176 
     1773. Projects: Carbon flux simulation in the context of the VERIFY project and in collaboration with CITEPA  
     178Matthew Mcgrath, Philippe Peylin, …. 
     179 
     180We started a discussion with CITEPA which is an agency making the Greenhouse gaz budget for France for the UNFCCC. They are considering of “possibly” using the ORCHIDEE model as an additional source of information for their budget (the NBP of ORC) 
     181 
     182We should probably phase these simulations with Project-1 of Guillaume Marie. 
     183 
     184But CITEPA could contribute as they have “made” specific land cover maps for France (annual) based on different products (ESA-CCI, a map from CESBIO, Corinne LC, ..) 
     185 
     1864. Produce adequate forcing to run ORCHIDEE at km-scales 
     187Jan Polcher, Nicolas Vuichard, Nathalie De Noblet, …  
     188To be able to use ORCHIDEE over France at an appropriate resolution we also need the adequate forcing. Not only in terms of spatial resolution but also on the quality of the diurnal cycle of rainfall. I.e. the intensity of rainfall needs to be correct so that all the issues with ORCHIDEE’s water cycle come to light and we can explore our ability to simulate extreme events. 
     189 
     190 
     191 
     192Bonjour a tous,  
     193 
     194Suite à l'échange d'email avec l'ADEME, Manuel Martin de l'INRAE infosol d'Orléans propose d'utiliser la carte de sol RMQS-RU pour la texture des sol et la RU, voici les deux publications concernant ce projet.   
     195 
     196  
     197Dobarco, M. R., Cousin, I., Le Bas, C., & Martin, M. P. (2019). Pedotransfer functions for predicting available water capacity in French soils, their applicability domain and associated uncertainty. Geoderma, 336, 81-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.08.022 
     198 
     199Dobarco, M. R., Bourennane, H., Arrouays, D., Saby, N. P., Cousin, I., & Martin, M. P. (2019). Uncertainty assessment of GlobalSoilMap soil available water capacity products: A French case study. Geoderma, 344, 14-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2019.02.036 
     200 
     201  
     202Pensez-vous que cette carte pourrait intégrer les cartes de forçage des textures de sol pour ORCHIDEE ? Manuel Martin parle d'une licence a obtenir pour accédé à la carte. Doit-on en déduire qu'elle sera payante ?  
     203  
     204 
     205Cordialement, 
     206 
     207Guillaume MARIE 
     208 
     209Bonjour Guillaume, 
     210 
     211j’avoue que je suis un peu perdue, et pour en rajouter une couche voici un autre papier, lié au 2ème ci-dessous: 
     212GlobalSoilMap France: High-resolution spatial modelling the soils of France up to two meter depth 
     213https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896971631511X#f0005 
     214D'ailleurs, si qq1 a les pdfs, je suis preneuse car je n'ai pas les droits pour les télécharger. 
     215 
     216Mais pour être un peu plus constructive, voici ce que je peux dire : 
     217 
     218Les paramètres hydriques sont actuellement au nb de 7 : ks (conductivité hydraulique), alpha et n (paramètres de van Genuchten), mcs (saturation), mcr (residual), mcw (wilting point), mcf (field capacity), sachant que les deux derniers peuvent être calculés à partir des 5 autres, et que la RU est donnée par le produit de leur différence (mcf-mcw) avec mcs et al profondeur du sol.  
     219 
     220Deux façons sont actuellement disponibles pour définir ces paramètres (dans la branche 2_2) : 
     221(a) lire une carte de classes de textures USDA (12 classes, qui peuvent être déduites des fractions de sand/clay) et utiliser les PTF discrètes (Carsel et Parrish 1988) codées dans constantes_soil_var.f90 
     222(b) lire une carte pour chacun des paramètres, ce qui permet d’être très flexible (c'est al nouveauté dans 2_2 et ça peut facilement intégré dans le trunk) 
     223 
     224Ensuite, il y a d'autres paramètres du sol dans ORCHIDEE: 
     225- la fraction d’argile qui sert dans stomate 
     226- les paramètres thermiques sont actuellement déduits de la texture, à partir d'une carte de classes de textures USDA 
     227 
     228Conclusion : même si on veut utiliser des cartes de paramètres hydriques, il faut actuellement rentrer une carte de classe de texture. 
     229 
     230Enfin, quand je regarde la carte de texture de surface en Figure 8 du papier ci-dessous, ça me semble une très bonne base. Par contre, on peut se demander s'il faut prendre la texture en surface ou à 30 cm. 
     231 
     232Suggestion: cartographier la classe texturale dominante à partir de cette carte (ou celle que vous aurez choisie in fine) à la résolution SAFRAN ; cartographier aussi les paramètres déduits avec nos PTFs et les comparer avec les cartes de paramètres recommandées par l'ADEME si c'est le cas. 
     233 
     234Amicalement, 
     235Agnès 
    2236 
    3237=== Intended uses === 
     238Dear Sebastiann, 
     239 
     240that is fine with me. 
     241 
     242You have to know that there is a project which will be submitted next 
     243week to build a forcing for ORCHIDEE at 3km. This would mean running 
     244RegIPSL (WRF+ORCHIDEE) forced with ERA5. It would provide a dynamically 
     245downscaled version of the re-analysis which can serve for model 
     246development ... and in the end see how these improvements feedback o the 
     247atmosphere. 
     248 
     249If Nicolas Vuichard attends the meeting he will be able to provide more 
     250details. 
     251 
     252        Best regards 
     253 
     254                Jan 
     255 
     256Dear Sebastiaan, 
     257 
     258I see this as progressive ! 
     259 
     260Yes, at high resolution some heterogeneities become more important. 
     261 
     262The plan would  to run RegIPSL with ORCHIDEE as it is over the 1979-2020 
     263period ... perhaps with some fudge for the background albedo. This gives 
     264a forcing data set which is already better for ORCHIDEE as the lower 
     265boundary conditions do not reflect HTESSEL any more. 
     266 
     267Using this high resolution forcing we can then work to refine ORCHIDEE, 
     268introduce new processes ... whatever is needed. When we feel confident 
     269that we have a model which is better suited to represent kilometric 
     270scale heterogeneities, then we can re-run RegIPSL. This achieved two 
     271goals : 
     2721) how important are these improvements to ORCHIDEE to better represent 
     273near surface atmospheric processes and what do we gain in terms of PBL 
     274structure and so on. 
     2752) we have a second version of forcings for ORCHIDEE off-line which can 
     276be the basis for further improvements. 
     277 
     278I see this as a key evolution of ORCHIDEE to fulfil the requests we get 
     279for climate services. 
     280 
     281I will ask Nicola if he is interested and has time for this meeting. 
     282 
     283        Best regards 
     284 
     285                Jan 
     286Forgot to add that we have a prototype for this. 
     287 
     288We have 10 years of ERA-I downscaled to 3km over the Iberian Peninsula. 
     289The domain goes up to Northern France but it is only usable south of the 
     290Loire. So that could easily be made available. 
     291 
     292The diurnal cycle of rainfall is quite different and much more realistic 
     293than ERA-I (compare to MF radar based climatologies). So that affects 
     294directly the interception loss and soil infiltration. Nobody is looking 
     295how the vegetation state predicted by ORCHIDEE are changing at these 
     296resolution ! 
     297 
     298        Best regards 
     299 
     300                Jan 
     301 
    4302 
    5303=== Discussion concerning the French configuration ===