SWE modelling: comparison between different approaches applied to Germany

Abstract

<p>The characterization of the snow cover by snow water equivalent (SWE) is fundamental in several environmental applications, e.g., monitoring mountain water resources or defining structural design standards. However, SWE observations are usually rare compared to other snow measurements as snow depth (HS). Therefore, model-based methods have been proposed in past studies for estimating SWE, in particular for short timescales (e.g., daily). In this study, we compare two different approaches for SWE-data modelling. The first approach, based on empirical regression models (ERMs), provides the regional parametrization of the bulk snow density, which can be used to estimate SWE values from HS. In particular, we investigate the performances of four different schemes based on previously developed ERMs of bulk snow density depending on HS, date, elevation, and location. Secondly, we apply the semi-empirical multi-layer Δsnow model, which estimates SWE solely based on snow depth observations. The open source Δsnow model has been recently used for deriving a snow load map for Austria, resulting in an improved Austrian standard. A large dataset of HS and SWE observations collected by the National Weather Service in Germany (DWD) is used for calibrating and validating the models. This dataset consists of daily HS and three-times-a-week SWE observations from in total ~1000 stations operated by DWD over the period from 1950 to 2020. A leave-one-out cross validation is applied to evaluate the performance of the different model approaches. It is based on 185 time series of HS and SWE observations that are representative of the diversity of the regional snow climatology of Germany. Cross validation reveals for all ERMs: 90% of the modelled SWE time series have a root mean square error (RMSE) and a bias lower than 45 kg/m² and 2 kg/m², respectively. The Δsnow model shows the best performance with 90% of the modelled SWE time series having an RMSE lower than 30 kg/m² and bias similar to the ERMs. This comparative study provides new insights on the reliability of model-based methods for estimating SWE values. The results show that the Δsnow model and, to a lower degree, the developed ERMs can provide satisfactory performances even on short timescales. This suggest that these models can be used as reliable alternative to more complex thermodynamic snow models, even more if long-term meteorological observations aside HS are scarce.</p>