Evaluation of snow cover in CLASS for SnowMIP

Abstract

An evaluation of the Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS) 3.1 snow cover simulations at four sites included in the Snow Model Intercomparison Project (SnowMIP) revealed that CLASS was able to provide realistic representations of snow cover accumulation, melt and physical properties over a range of snow cover climates. The modified snow aging parametrization in CLASS 3.1 provided improved simulations of snowpack density which resulted in a marked reduction in the root‐mean‐square (rms) error for daily snow depth, and slight improvements in snow surface temperature. CLASS 3.1 still exhibited a tendency to overestimate snow cover duration which is attributed to the way shallow snow ablation is treated. CLASS provided generally realistic simulations of daily and seasonal variation in snow albedo although cold snow albedo was underpredicted by 0.10 to 0.15 at a site with a deep (> 2 m) cold snowpack. CLASS also exhibited a tendency to overpredict late spring snow albedo which was reduced by the addition of a snow layer subroutine that kept track of snow albedo by precipitation event. CLASS had a noticeable cold bias averaging 3°–4°C at two mountain sites included in the comparison. The bias was closely linked to atmospheric stability and could exceed 10°C under conditions of strong radiative cooling and low wind speeds. The CLASS energy deficit under these conditions was determined to be ∼20–40 W m−2 and was mostly accounted for by introducing a windless exchange coefficient into the calculation of sensible heat fluxes following the approach used in a number of other physical snowpack models. CLASS provided realistic simulations of daily snowmelt runoff with the exception of the Weissfluhjoch site which was characterized by a deep cold snowpack. A preliminary assessment of snow water equivalent (SWE) rms error for the 23 models participating in SnowMIP showed that CLASS was one of the better single layer snow models included in the comparison. CLASS performance was comparable to the multi‐layer CROCUS snowpack model in the evaluations carried out in this study.