Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Saving LND->GLC coupler history files in future NorESM runs as a default option #82

Open
mpetrini-norce opened this issue Sep 6, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@mpetrini-norce
Copy link

mpetrini-norce commented Sep 6, 2024

Many relevant future NorESM2.5/NorESM3 experiments (e.g. CMIP7) will be done keeping the ice sheet component (GLC) in data mode (DGLC-NOEVOLVE) or in stub mode (SGLC). Since saving annual LND->GLC coupler history files does not depend neither on the GLC mode nor on the GLC domain or resolution (see Section 3.3.1 in https://escomp.github.io/cism-docs/cism-in-cesm/versions/release-cesm2.0/html/t-compsets.html), I would like to propose that saving GLC coupler history files becomes a default option in future NorESM versions. I think there are three main reasons supporting this:

  1. Annual LND->GLC coupler history files are relatively small in size (one year worth of data is 15 MB; even in the case of a 400 years-long simulation, annual coupler history files printed out every year would not exceed 6 GB);

  2. Saving coupler history files requires to (a) properly set up the GLACIER_REGION variable in the surface dataset, which should specify the domain(s) you wanted to calculate the SMB over (typically Greenland and Antarctica; this is already implemented in the NorESM2 surface dataset), (b) set in the user_nl_clm namelist glacier_region_behavior = virtual and glacier_region_melt_behavior = replaced_by_ice in the regions you want to calculate the SMB over (GLACIER_REGION takes integer values from 0 onwards. For example, if the Greenland region has a value of 1, then the second entry for the above-mentioned namelist variables should be 'virtual' and 'replaced_by_ice', and (c) set in the user_nl_cpl namelist histaux_l2x1yrg = .true. All these changes are highly case-independent, and once there it is unlikely that are going to be modified (even in the case of GLC_EVOLVE).

  3. Coupler history files would allow to force CISM in T-compset mode (see https://escomp.github.io/cism-docs/cism-in-cesm/versions/release-cesm2.0/html/t-compsets.html), which is equivalent to a one-way coupled NorESM-CISM run (i.e., where ice sheet changes are not feeding back on the climate). This would open, for any future NorESM2.5/NorESM3 experiment, to assess the response of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.

@mvertens @hgoelzer

@mpetrini-norce
Copy link
Author

@gold2718 Hi Steve, I have two questions related to this issue (which I added to the NorESM development project):

  1. I cannot assign this issue because I have no permission to do that on the CTSM repository. Also, even if I could I wouldn't know who to assign it to. This change that I am suggesting is a simple switch in the user_nl_cpl namelist. Maybe you are the person to assign it to? Could you 'self-assign' it if that is the case?

  2. We would like to check the progress on this issue on the 'CISM view' - however, to do that we need to add to the filter the 'NorESMhub/CTSM' tag, and this implies including things that are not relevant for CISM. Is there a way to select only certain items from a tag?

Thanks

@gold2718 gold2718 added this to the NorESM2.5 milestone Jan 13, 2025
@gold2718 gold2718 added the CISM label Jan 13, 2025
@gold2718
Copy link

@mpetrini-norce, I will find the best person to make this change (could be me but I need to consult with someone on the CTSM side). Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

I agree that there is no simple way to add a single issue to the CISM tracker tab from a NorESMhub repo. Perhaps the easiest approach is to create a CISM issue that references this one.

@gold2718 gold2718 removed the CISM label Jan 13, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Todo
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants