Newsgroups: lter.ced Path: LTERnet!daniel From: bph@virginia.edu Subject: CED 2.8 Message-ID: <1993Oct7.202218.7633@lternet.washington.edu> Sender: daniel@lternet.washington.edu (Daniel Pommert) Organization: Long Term Ecological Research Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1993 19:35:22 GMT ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** *** *** *** *********** *********** ********** *** *** * * * * *** *** * * * * *** *** * * * * *** *** * ********* * * *** *** * * * * *** *** * * * * *** *** * * * * *** *** * * * * *** *** *********** *********** ********** *** *** *** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** Vol.2 No.8 :::::: file name:CED2.8 :::::: October 1+, 1993 ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** CED METADATA ---- CED is the Climate/Ecosystem Dynamics bulletin board ofthe LTER network. In CED, you will find exchanges of ideas, information, data, bibliographies, literature discussions, and a place to find experts withinthe LTER community. We are interested in both climate controls on ecosystems and ecosystem controls on climate. As this is an inter-disciplinaryactivity, we hope to provide things that you might not come across in your work atyour LTER site. CED is a product of the LTER climate committee and contributions to CED for general e-mail release may be sent to either David Greenland of Andrews LTER [Greenlan@oregon.uoregon.edu] or to Bruce Hayden of the Virginia Coast Reserve LTER [bph@envsci.evsc.virginia.edu]. We expect that the scope of CED will evolve and reflect the interests of the contributors and users of this service. CED will be issued as the preparation work gets done (usually monthly). Back-issus of CED may be requested from Daniel Pommert [daniel@lternet.washington.edu] by the file name given in the masthead. Daniel can also add people to the CED mailing list. Feedback on CED from LTER scientists is welcome (non-$$$$ contributions also welcome.) For example, please forward citations of climate & ecosystem publications on your site. We are keeping a LTER wide bibliography on Climate/Ecosystem Dynamics that we pass on via E-mail. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** *** *** *** *** *** CED Returns *** *** *** *** *** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** End of the growing season obligations, start of the Fall semester, work on our LTER renewal proposal, preparation for the Estes Park Meeting and other necessities left little time to finish the end of August copy for CED. Well, we are back. All you old CED readers have new company. I was able to hawk subscriptions to this rag at a pretty good rate at the high altitude of Estes Park and the heady stuff spoken by one and all. Better yet, old readers clustered around the kegs were very kind in their appreciation of this the only publication of climate, ecosystems and humor on the network wires. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** *** *** *** *** *** STAPLETON AIRPORT *** *** epicenter of bad weather *** *** *** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** Getting to Estes Park was an adventure for LTERer filled jumbo-jets. A honey of a thunderstorm and reports of microbursts near the Stapleton runways convinced our pilot that parking on the runway at Colorado Springs was a better deal than dodging Denver microbursts. It is wonderful to have a cautious pilot when you know what a microburst really is. The long lines of big jets on the tiny tarmac of Colorado Springs was a lively item of chit-chat at Estes Park beer and m&m socials. There were lots of "It is hard as hell to get in and out of Stapleton without a weather screw-up." and "It is good to have car rentals waiting at all the surrounding airports." Well, after Estes Park, I chatted with my old friend Roger Pielke at CSU and I also bothered two of his modelers (worth-getting-to-know John Lee and Joe Eastman) to show me their good stuff. They are doing work on what the ground (land cover and land use) is like and what it means on days when thunderstorms are in the brewing. They are interested in the differences in thunderstorms and rainfall when you use modern land use and land cover in the model as compared to using what was there before Sitting Bull's parents (Mr. Bull and Ms. Cow) were talking about a little Bull. I will tell CED readers about this wonderful work in more detail at a later time. For now it should be sufficient to note that the timing and location of thunderstorms depends on the surface, i.e. the biosphere. It especially depends on the patchiness of the surface and the relative amounts of latent and sensible heat flux to the atmosphere from the various patches. When you put a lot of latent heat up into the atmosphere over a patchy surface, the thunderstorms kick up kind of early in the day. When the surface is uniform and there is a balance between sensible and latent heat, thunderstorms happen later in the day and have a bigger rainfall pay-off. Well, Denver has wonderful patches of sensible heat producers: dirt, streets, rooftops, and all other manner of livelihood-generating surfaces. With the resulting full wallets and all the BMWs they can use, they can afford to pay the water bills to have nice grass and fine trees. The citizens of Denver have inflicted a climate change on the former short grass prairies. ET from Denver is greater than from the surrounding countryside filled with Coloradans of lesser means. Roger's models would find it a fine place to build thunderstorms early in the convective day. My plane tried to come into Stapleton in the early afternoon. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** *** *** *** *** *** RECYCLED RAIN *** *** *** *** *** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** Christopher Columbus, knew of deforestation of the Canary and Azores Islands. He believed and passed on the idea that when the forest is cut, the rains don't return. We covered much of this concept months ago in an earlier CED. Early attempts to attach a folk-lore causality to all this focused on the forests attracting clouds and then reaping the benefits of the rains that followed. It was obvious then and now that clouds are more common over islands than over the adjacent sea. In fact clouds form above islands. Later, when transpiration was discovered, it was assumed that the plants provided the water for the clouds that brought the rain. It was a nice, neat in-place version of what we would now call the hydrological cycle. Cut the trees and you break this cycle. By the first decade of the current century the scientific, meteorological lore was shifting to "It comes from the oceans, stupid!" R. Zon's paper in Science in 1913 put "the trees do it" back in the lime-light. Then up until the late 1930s, atmospheric scientists believed that the water precipitated over the continents was directly derived from moisture evaporated from the continents (Benton et al., 1950). Lack of direct evidence and big oceans with a lot of sunlight capture surface and high evaporation rates killed "the trees do it" paradigm. Budget studies for reservoirs and other impoundments didn't require any ET water vapor to balance the budget. Well, perhaps 10% or less of the rain was from ET water. As this was within the error term in such budgets, it could be ignored. The paradigm of our times had become ... the water in the rains that falls on the continents comes from the oceans. The 10% in this view can be called recycled rain. In my talk at Estes Park and this CED we look at modern calculations of recycled rain. The 10% is much to low. "The trees do it" is coming back. Zon's paper in Science in 1913 is a must read! You all know how much I like finding old stuff that new people claim to have discovered in the present day. The full reference is at the end of this CED. Read it first then read all the papers on recycled rain. Consider your parental duties regarding recycled rain whan you get the question, "Daddy, where does rain come from?" The flip answer is: "The clouds you wonderful little twerp." Hard questions are always such a bother. Well, if you want to tell your own brand-name of Homo sapiens subspecies little-twerp the state-of-the-art answer, you have a look at Koster et al. (1986) or Joussaume and Sadourny (1986). They use General Circulation Models (GCMs) to trace water molecules from their evaporative source to their outfall as raindrops. They keep separate track of the water molecules that escape from the ocean surface from those that make it by evapotranspiration. Then they tabulate the fraction from each source in the rain that falls. They can then answer questions like: Where does the ET from Konza rain out? and Where did the rain at Harvard Forest get ETed? In the last 20 years other scientists without the aid of GCMs have asked questions like these, found ways to answer them, and came up with similar answers much bigger than 10%. We covered recycled rain at the Estes Park talk on ecosystem controls on climate. The references I cited at that talk are given at the end of this CED. We will return to recycled rain in future CED issues. Also in later issues I will deal with the many ways vegetation controls with clouds and rain: condensation nuclei, electric charges, ice nuclei, ET-water vapor, sensible heating, albedo and kinds of vegetation. Should be fun. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** *** *** *** *** *** FAST CLIMATE CHANGE *** *** *** *** *** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** CED readers know that, from time to time, I keep you posted on matters of the little spats climatologists are having over the reality global warming and it has been several months since I last brought you up to speed. Well, I can't wait another issue. The Washington Post is beginning to scoop me on this stuff. Global warming has been just-around-the-corner now for the better part of a decade. In 1988, James Hansen of Goddard-GISS-GCM fame told Congress we would surely see big-time, global warming kick-in in the early 90s. Well, now that the first third of the 1990s is over, we are still looking for the promise-land of a warmed-world. Almost all the 0.35 C or 0.45 C warming (depends on who you believe) has been nighttime warming. There is little or no daytime warming that could drive your ET sub-model to soar to desiccating, protoplasm-killing heights. Well, what do you do when The Warming is coming too slow and not exactly in the form advertised? Try this -- It comes all at once. Fast. Quick. Pronto! Hang on Chicken Little! Nature magazine (July 15 this year) suggests that global warming could give rise to the next ice age! Get a grip on yourself because GRIP (Greenland Ice Core Project) people have looked at the last 250,000 ice-core-year history of climate and warn us of the unexpected. M. Anklin and a host of other ice-core massaging co-authors warn us of just what happened in the interglacial before our current Holocene interglacial. Now that deceased interglacial got as warm as the "industrial" warming we are projected to get. Anklin's lets us muse that in the middle of that life-on-earth-threatening, interglacial hothouse had at least one world-class cooling! Greenland ice suggests that temperatures fell a two-exclaimation-mark 10 to 14 C in 10-20 years!! That is on the order of 1 C per year! We have just had a 0.35 C or 0.45 C warming (at night) over the last 120 years. If Anklin is right that means that the GCM-projected 3 C in 100 years is just a piker compared to what has happened in the past. Science magazine not to be bested by Nature magazine also has its quick-draw gunslinger in the fast-climate-change sweepstakes of 1993. This time it is Mayewski et al. Sci. 261:195-197. Mayewski finds that right in the middle of the "Younger Dryas" warm-blip at the end of the last ice age(12,940 to 11,640 years ago) a several degree cooling in 10-20 periods. So warm, interglacials periods, like our Holocene can have big time climate changes (in this case, plunges toward ice ages). So, be careful during your wait for the promised warming. It could happen real, real quick. So we better act now to stop it. But stop what? Getting warm fast or cold fast? Oh, bother. We will have to read and believe both of Steve Schneiders books: the one on global cooling and the one on global warming. We can then take the average of his policy recommendations. This is the New Age of consensus! An old friend, Reid Bryson, took a little social-gas from his Science article way back in 1974 when he said: "Ice age climates may end (and probably start) in a century or two... Holocene (present day) climate changes, smaller in magnitude, may be accomplished in decades. The overriding present question, of course, is how the present climate change will develop." Big-time, speedy climate change is PC now in the slow-to-come-world-warming of the 1990s but was definitely not so PC in 1974. Reid wasn't exactly the black-sheep in the family of meteorologists but you could sell his hue of wool at the best of today's New Age Bazaars. What comes around goes around! The hunt for global warming made the pages (3-pages) of the Washington Post on July 26. This one is sort of an intra-squad scrimmage. It was NASA Goddard on one end of their little cow pasture and NASA Huntsville on the other. The pumpkin in question at the 50 yard line was seeing global warming. The boys from Huntsville with the satellite thermometer can't see a lick of warming in the post-1980 years. The Goddard retort starts with a very unlike Hansen "if", "... if there's a greenhouse warming it should be visible in their data. The fact that it isn't tells me there's something wrong with their data." When in doubt discard the data. Well, how do we settle all this? I would suggest you listen to the wonderful Aeronautical Engineer Igor Sikorsky. He told a passel of graduating engineers "In the course of your work you will from time to time encounter the situation where the facts and theory do not coincide. In such circumstances, young gentlemen, it is my earnest advice to respect the facts." ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** *** *** *** *** *** TELLING THE LIE *** *** AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN *** *** *** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** Glaucon, one of Socrates debating partners, on the matter of audacious fiction and getting everyone to believe it, spoke: "Not in the present generation; there is no way of accomplishing this; but their sons may be made to believe in the tale, and their son's sons, and posterity after them." This of course came to be known as the "Big Lie." You probably thought Hitler didn't know his philosophy! So it is time to return to our audacious LTER Cephlomorphometrics. The CED faithful will recall my first foray into cephlomorphometrics in my report to the community following the Bonanza Creek and Arctic Tundra Coordinating Committee field trip. In CED 1.7 there is a little offering titled "Broca's Brain on the North Slope." In that report I told my method: stealth from behind baseball cap wearers. A quick glance at the plastic "post and hole" cap fastener and I could count the number of posts used in holes to hold the cap in place against the resisting force dispersed along the cranial circumference. The sample size was modest (N=20). This was no All Scientist Meeting with 450 targets in attendance. My sample size was 120 at the All Scientist Meeting in Estes Park. The N=20 data indicated that on the average 2.4 posts filled holes on hat fasteners. This number is a plus or minus 1 S.D. of 1.273 (Kurtosis -0.582 ; skewness 0.151). At Estes Park there were pinheads as in Alaska but the fatheads were out in force. The halls of the YMCA of the Rockies were like the adipose cells sucking in all the LTER triglycerides. We were a skewed-to-the-fathead-side-group. The NSF elite, in almost seasonal migration numbers, made notable contributions to the fathead bulge in my cephlomorphometric spreadsheet. No names need be included. In spite of the inclusion of a new pinhead (a rotating pinhead) in the NSF contingent, the NSF team was reminiscent of gorillas in the mist with a petite-pinheaded Dian Fossey type adding balance of a sort to the chest pounding types. Even during the Alaska CC meeting trip, the NSF crowd, though pinheaded, had a high coefficient of variation but were not skewed like the fleet flown in from Washington for the ASM meeting. Now the stealth-behind-the-back-observation method used during the Alaska CC meeting may seem an unfair way to take data but this is a form of investigative journalism sometimes called Woodwardianism. But, the job was done. The piece written. And the copy e-mailed. The Alaska Survey was ripe. Howls of all sorts came from the home-team MBL leaders. MBL is the WHOI home of Arctic Tundra types. Intersite comparability could not be claimed for my tabloid-style excuse for scientific inquiry. My measurement hats were from everymans hat. Had I used a single cap, my numbers would be believable. CED readers will remember that NSF VIPs fell in the "pinhead" class in that survey and that Network officials dead normal. While Franklin was a bit of an outlier, the even headedness of the working staff carried the day then as it did in our Estes Park survey. Our Woods Hole friends, however, in defense of VIP and living by the local motto "suck-up good and suck-up often" came to the defense of the Washington VIPs who fund them and questioned my data! Pinheads in Washington, no way! CED stands corrected. They are fatheads thanks to a noted personality who has been known to use the term dirtball to characterize ecologists. Armed with a University of North Carolina baseball cap which was 5 posts different than the Alaska average hat [North Carolina is filled with tar-stained pinheads], I prowled the environs of the LTER ASM party at Estes Park. Two people refused to wear any UNC apparel of any kind or any size. My study suffers accordingly. With the exception of the occasional bleating about safe-cap-doning, everyone, in a tribute to Andy Warhol, looked like a tarheel for a few minutes. While my subjects ranged from the NSF Acting Director to graduate student David Osgood, no names are to be found in my data set. I am not dumb. So in writing this little piece I can't even be obviously indirect with the occasional, well-crafted nom de plume. Anyway, Tom Callahan was not included in the 1992 Alaska survey but he was at Estes Park and he made the new survey in a big way. This will account for any differences in the results of this just-starting, long-term data set on LTER cerebralism. LTER graduate students had on average 0.23 posts smaller heads than PIs. It seem clear that there is a convergence on brain-filling but the process is not yet complete and degrees need not be awarded until their brains are full. Andrews site was the most fatheaded of all the sites and are obvious candidates to fill rotating NSF Washington posts. CPR won the contest for most pinheaded among sites with a large 0.333 post difference from the next most small-minded of sites: the Arctic Tundra. Now I know that there will be a din of complaint from ARC that "Doc Savage" was not measured and has had considerable cranial advancement in 1993 and that Pinheadedness is out of the question for the ARC team. Rastetter is still a young buck at ARC-MBL-WHOI who has a crainal growth rate that lags behind ego develoopment but he was inconsequential in the CED cephlomorphometric survey. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** *** *** *** *** *** EL NINO AT ESTES PARK *** *** *** *** *** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** A good time was had by all at the El Nino Workshop. Six LTER sites reported on El Nino signals detected and discussed ecosystem consequences. Plans to work toward a chapter on the conferences synthesis volume are on hold for the time being as a few glitches came up on birthing of the volume. So the Climate Committee should and I hope will move ahead with an internal white paper on the subject. David Greenland, I hope, be willing to collect the contributions, xerox multiply them, design a nice cover and produce the mini-volume for internal distribution. This will be a modest little contribution from each site: perhaps 5 terse pages or so of text and the needed figures and tables. We will put a conference preface and summary on the ends and see if we can get the network pay for distribution. When it is ready, we will use the pages of CED to solicit those who want to get a copy and get them mailed out with dispatch. If the conference volume surfaces we will be ready to do our part and do it well. A working group e-mail bulletin board is being established by Daniel at Network central. It will be called elnino@lternet.edu. Anything you send to will go out to everyone who signs up for the bulletin board. If you want to be in the know tell daniel@lternet.edu to sign you up. If you find new literature on El Nino send the reference to elnino@lternet.edu and everyone will get it. If you see a news clipping, type it up and send it to elnino@lternet.edu and everyone will see it. If you have questions on how to hunt for El Nino signatures at your site put the question on the wire to elnino@lternet.edu and everyone can have a go at it. When someone answers everyone gets the answer. Now that the Evil Empire is no more we can use the term party-line for this communication link. If you are shy about getting on a party line, get some beer and m&ms and sit down to your keyboard and dream that you are in the chapel at the YMCA of the Rockies and make your offering. PS: Remember that the El Nino workshop desire was to include all manner of intra-annual climate variations that are likely to have ecosystem consequences. Southern Oscillation, sunspot, quasibiennial oscillation, volcanic eruptions, and just by chance runs of weather and climate and so on. We can call them LTER time-scale variations in climate. Give elnino@lternet.edu a call. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** *** *** *** *** *** REFERENCES FOR ASM *** *** ECOSYSTEM CONTROLS ON CLIMATE TALK *** *** *** ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** Some References used my All Sciences talk (with more later): "Source of Seasonal Variations in Solar Radiation at Mauna Loa" Bodhaine and Pueschel J. of Atm. Sci. 31:840-845. "World-wide Source of Leaf-derived Freezing Nuclei" R. C. Schnell and G. Vali. Nature 246:212-213. "Atmospheric Ice Nuclei from Decomposing Vegetation" R. C. Schnell and G. Vali. Nature 236:163-165. "Biogenic Ice Nuclei: Part I. Terrestrial and Marine Sources." R. C. Schnell and G. Vali. J. Atm. Sci. 33:1554-1564. Influence of Land Surface Evapotranspiration on the Earth's Climate. J. Shukla and Y. Mintz. Science 215:1498-1501. "The Boreal Forest and Climate. G. Thomas and P. R. Rowntree. Q.J.R. Meteorol. Soc (1992) 118:469-497. "Thunderstorms as related to organic matter in the atmosphere." F. W. Went (1962). PNAS 48(3)309-316. "On the nature of Aitken condensation nuclei." F. W. Went. Tellus (1966) "The organic Nature of Atmospheric Condensation Nuclei. PNAS 18(2)549-556, "Modeling the Land Surface Boundary in Climate Models as a Composite of Independent Vegetation Stands. R. D. Koster and Max JK. Suarz. J.G.R. 97(D)2697-2715. "Enhancement of Convective Precipitation by Mesoscale Variations in Vegetative Covering in Semiarid Regions. R. A. Anthes. J. of Climate and Applied Meteorology. (1984). 23:540-553. "A Parameter Study of Interactions Between Convective Clouds, the Convective Boundary Layer, and a Forested Surface. (1982) MWR 110:1041-1059. "Spring Phenology: Nature's Experiment to Detect the Effect of Green-Up on Surface Maximum Temperatures." M. D. Schwartz and T. R. Karl Monthly Weather Review (1990)118:883-890. "Blue Hazes in the Atmosphere" R. W. Went (1960). Nature 187:641-643. "The Relation of Forests in the Atlantic Plain to the Humidity of the Central States and Prairie Region. R. Zon. (1913). Science 38(968):63-75. "Estimation of Continental Precipitation Recycling: K. L. Brubaker, D. Entekhabi, and P. S. Eagleson. (1993). J. of Climate. 6:1077-1089. "Origin of Precipitating Water in A Numberical Simulation of the July Climate. S. Joussaume and R. Sadourny. (1986). Ocean-Air Interactdions. 1:043-056. "Effects of Boreal Forest Vegetation on Global Climate". G. Bonan, D. Pollard and S. L. Thompson.(1993: Nature) "Global Sources of Local Precipitation as Determined by the NASA/GISS GCM. R. Koster et al., 1986. Geophysical Research Letters 13(1)121-124. "A Study of the Hydrology of Eastern North America Using Atemospheric Vapor Flux Data." E. M. Rasmusson (1971) Monthly Weather Review 99(2):119-135. "Atmospheric WAter Vapor Transport and the Water Balance of North America." Part I. E. M. Rasmusson (1971). Monthly Weather Review 95(10):720-734. "Atmospheric WAter Vapor Transport and the Water Balance of North America." Part II. E. M. Rasmusson (1971). Monthly Weather Review 95(7):403-426. "Water-Vapor Transfer Over the North American Continent." G. S. Benton and M. A. Estoque (1954). J. of Meteorology 11:462-477. "Evapotranspiration Climatolomy. Part I. H. Letteau (1969). 97(10):691-699. "Exchange of Water Vapor Between Land and Ocean in the Northern Hemisphere. R. D. Rosen and A. S. Omolayo. (1981) JGR 86(C12)12,147-12,152. "Influence of Halophyte Plantings in Arid Regions on Local Atmospheric Structure. R. A. Pielke, T. J. Lee, E. P. Glenn and R. Avissar. (1993) Biometeorology 37:96-100. "Amazonia's Hydrologic Cycle and the Role of Atmospheric Recyucling in Assessing Deforestatiion Effects. H. Letteau, K. Letteau, and L. C. B. Moliion. (1979). 107(3):227-238. "Recycling of Water in the Amazon Basin: An Isotopic Study. E. Salati, A. Dall"Oliio, E. Matsui, and J. R. Gat. (1979). WRR 15(5)1250-1`258. "Influence of Local Land-Surface Processes on the Indian Monsoon: A Numerical Study. Y. C. Sud and W. E. Smith. (1985). J. of Climate and Appl. Meteorology 24:1015-1036 "Modelling the Effects of Albedo Change Associated with Tropical Deforestation. M. F. Mylne and P. R. Rowntree (1992). Climate Change 21:317-343. "Ice Nuclei Produced by Laboratory Cultured Marine Phytoplankton. R. C. Schnell. (1975). Geophyscial Research Letters 2(11)500-502. "Generatioin of Ice Nuclei in the Surface Outflow of Thunderstorms in Northeast Colorado. G. Langer, G. Morgan, C. T. Nagamoto, M. Solak, and J. Rosinski. (1979). J. Atm. Sci.35:2484-2494. "A GCM Simulation Study of the Influence of Saharan Evapotranspiration and Surface-Albedo Anomalies on July Circulation and Rainfall. Y. C. Sud and A. Molod. (1988). Monthly Weather Review 116:2388-2400. "Simulations of the Saharan Atmosphere--Dependence on Moisture and Albedo. W. M. Cunnington and P. R,Rowntree. (1986). Q. J. R. Met. Soc. 112:971-999. "Influence of Evaporation in Semi-Arid Regions on the July Circulation: A Numerical Study. Y. C. Sud and M. J. Fennessy. (1984). J of Climatology 4:383-398. "Ensemble Formulation of Surface Fluxes and Improvement in Evapotranspiration and Cloud Parameterizations in a GCM. Y. C. Sud and W. E. Smith. (1984). Boundary-Layer Meteorology 29:185-210. "Sensitivity of Climate Simulations to Land Surface and Atmospheric Boundary-Layer Treatments -- A Review. J. R. Garratt (1993). J. of Climate 6:419-449 "An Approach to Examining Regional Atmosphere-Plant Interactions with Phenological Data. M. D. Schwartz and G. A. Marotz. (1986) J. of Biogeograpohy 13:551-560. "Nonlinear Influence of Mesoscale Land Use on Weather and Climate" R.A. Pielke et al., (1991) J. of Climate 4:1053-1069. "Influence of Land Surface Roughness on Atmospheric Circulation and Precipitation: A Sensitivity Study with a General Circulation Model. Y. C. Suc and J. Shukla and Y. Mintz. (1988). J. of Appl. Meteorology 27:1036-1054. THAT IS ALL FOR NOW -- MORE LATER.