Intercomparison of three urban climate models

TLDR: In this article, an intercomparison of the surface energy budgets from three urban climate models was made to assess the comparability of results, and to evaluate surface energy fluxes from each model.

Abstract: An intercomparison of the surface energy budgets from three urban climate models was made to assess the comparability of results, and to evaluate the surface energy fluxes from each model. The three models selected spanned the continuum of approaches currently employed in the treatment of the effects of urban geometry. The first model was an urban canopy-layer model which explicitly examined urban canyon geometry. The second model treated the city as a warm, rough, moist plate but included greatly simplified parameterizations of urban geometry. Neither model included a dynamic link to the urban boundary-layer. The third model was a one-dimensional urban boundary-layer model which utilized a simple warm, rough, moist plate approach but included a dynamic coupling of the urban surface layer to the urban boundary-layer. Results showed considerable disagreement between the three models in regards to the individual energy fluxes. Average rankings of the energy fluxes in terms of comparability from high-to-low similarity were: (1) solar radiation, (2) sensible heat flux, (3) conduction, (4) latent heat flux, (5) longwave re-radiation, and (6) longwave radiation input. In general, the urban canopy-layer model provided more realistic results, although each model demonstrated strong and weak points. Results indicate that current urban boundary-layer models may produce surface energy budgets with lower sensible heat fluxes and substantially higher latent heat fluxes than is supported by field evidence from the literature.