Constraints on Estimating Mass, Heat and Freshwater Transports in the Arctic Ocean: An Exercise

Rudels, Bert; Marnela, Marika; Eriksson, Patrick

doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6774-7_14

Cited by 39 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Baumgartner and Reichel, 1975;Wijffels, 2001;Rudels et al, 2008) had to be removed to be compatible with our results. In the Southern Hemisphere, the GECCO freshwater transport is closest to Wijffel's and Talley's independent estimates.…”

Section: North Atlantic Freshwater Budgetsupporting

confidence: 82%

Sea surface freshwater flux estimates from GECCO, HOAPS and NCEP

Romanova¹,

KÃ¶hl²,

Stammer³

et al. 2010

TELLUSA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C T Surface net freshwater flux fields, estimated from the GECCO ocean state estimation effort over the 50 yr period , are compared to purely satellite-based HOAPS freshwater flux estimates and to the NCEP atmospheric re-analysis net surface freshwater flux fields to assess the quality of all flux products and to improve our understanding of the time-mean surface freshwater flux distribution as well as its temporal variability. Surface flux fields are adjusted by the GECCO state estimation procedure together with initial temperature and salinity conditions so that the model simulation becomes consistent with ocean observations. The entirely independent HOAPS net surface freshwater flux fields result from the difference between SSM/I based precipitation estimates and fields of evaporation resulting from a bulk aerodynamic approach using SSM/I data and the Pathfinder SST. All three products agree well on a global scale. However, overall GECCO seems to have moved away from the NCEP/NCAR first guess surface fluxes and is often closer to the HOAPS data set. This holds for the time mean as well as for the seasonal cycle.

show abstract

Section: North Atlantic Freshwater Budgetsupporting

confidence: 82%

Sea surface freshwater flux estimates from GECCO, HOAPS and NCEP

Romanova¹,

KÃ¶hl²,

Stammer³

et al. 2010

TELLUSA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…of the same magnitude of or even smaller than the monthly changes derived for the Fram Strait flow, compensation of large changes can be doubted. Rudels et al (2008) discussed that misinterpreting erroneous Fram Strait net transport by flow through other passages would constrain the Arctic fresh water budget in an implausible way. Similar considerations hold for strong variability of the net flow on monthly to annual scales.…”

Section: Discussion Of Inherent Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problems with estimation and interpretation of oceanic heat transport – conceptual remarks for the case of Fram Strait in the Arctic Ocean

Schauer

Beszczynska-Möller²

2009

Ocean Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. While the concept of oceanic heat transport -or rather heat transport divergence -is well known, it is sometimes applied inaccurately. Often so-called "heat transports" are computed across a partial section which means that the volume flow through such a section is not zero. In this case the "heat transports" depend entirely on the choice of the temperature scale. The consequences of such arbitrariness are demonstrated with a simple calculation exercise for the passages to the Arctic Ocean. To circumvent the arising difficulties for the Fram Strait in the Arctic we propose a stream tube concept to define a net zero volume flow section which can, with coarse assumptions, be used to determine oceanic heat transport by the portion of Atlantic water flow that passes through Fram Strait. Weaknesses of this approach and consequences for observational strategies are discussed.

show abstract

“…20). The net transport is about 2 Sv out of the Arctic Ocean and the mean total in-and outflows are estimated to 7 Sv and 9 Sv, respectively, based on geostrophy (Rudels et al, 2008) and to 12 Sv and 14 Sv from direct current observations (Schauer et al, 2008). The flow has a strong barotropic component, strongest in the West Spitsbergen Current but significant also in the East Greenland Current, which makes geostrophic calculations unreliable and subjective, depending upon how the unknown barotropic component is handled or approximated.…”

Section: The Exchanges Through Fram Straitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arctic Ocean circulation and variability – advection and external forcing encounter constraints and local processes

Rudels

2012

Ocean Sci.

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The first hydrographic data from the Arctic Ocean, the section from the Laptev Sea to the passage between Greenland and Svalbard obtained by Nansen on his drift with Fram 1893-1896, aptly illustrate the main features of Arctic Ocean oceanography and indicate possible processes active in transforming the water masses in the Arctic Ocean. Many, perhaps most, processes were identified already by Nansen, who put his mark on almost all subsequent research in the Arctic. Here we shall revisit some key questions and follow how our understanding has evolved from the early 20th century to present. What questions, if any, can now be regarded as solved and which remain still open? Five different but connected topics will be discussed: (1) The low salinity surface layer and the storage and export of freshwater. (2) The vertical heat transfer from the Atlantic water to sea ice and to the atmosphere. (3) The circulation and mixing of the two Atlantic inflow branches. (4) The formation and circulation of deep and bottom waters in the Arctic Ocean. (5) The exchanges through Fram Strait. Foci will be on the potential effects of increased freshwater input and reduced sea ice export on the freshwater storage and residence time in the Arctic Ocean, on the deep waters of the Makarov Basin, and on the circulation and relative importance of the two inflows, over the Barents Sea and through Fram Strait, for the distribution of heat in the intermediate layers of the Arctic Ocean.

show abstract

Constraints on Estimating Mass, Heat and Freshwater Transports in the Arctic Ocean: An Exercise

Cited by 39 publications

References 40 publications

Sea surface freshwater flux estimates from GECCO, HOAPS and NCEP

Sea surface freshwater flux estimates from GECCO, HOAPS and NCEP

Problems with estimation and interpretation of oceanic heat transport – conceptual remarks for the case of Fram Strait in the Arctic Ocean

Arctic Ocean circulation and variability – advection and external forcing encounter constraints and local processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About