the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Global ocean surface heat fluxes revisited: A new dataset from maximum entropy production framework with heat storage and Bowen ratio optimizations
Abstract. Ocean evaporation (latent heat flux, LE) plays a crucial role in global precipitation patterns, water cycle dynamics, and energy exchange processes. However, current bulk methods for quantifying ocean evaporation are subject to significant uncertainties. The Maximum Entropy Production (MEP) theory offers a novel approach for estimating surface heat fluxes, but its effectiveness over ocean surfaces has not been validated. This study integrates heat storage effects and four empirical Bowen ratio formulas into the MEP theory to improve ocean LE estimation. We employed multi-source data from 129 globally distributed buoy stations and seven auxiliary turbulent flux datasets for validation and comparison. We first evaluated the MEP method using observed data from buoy stations, identifying the optimal Bowen ratio formula to enhance the model. Results indicate that accounting for heat storage and adjusting the Bowen ratio significantly improve heat flux accuracy, with R2=0.99 and a root mean squared error (RMSE) of 4.7 W·m-2 compared to observations. Subsequently, we conducted a thorough evaluation of seven global turbulent flux datasets to identify the most accurate input variables (e.g., heat storage, net radiation, surface temperature) for applying the MEP method on a global ocean scale. The enhanced MEP method provided new estimates of the annual average LE at 93 W·m-2 and sensible heat at 12 W·m-2 for the period 1988 to 2017. Validation against observations from 129 buoy stations demonstrated that the MEP-derived latent heat dataset achieved the highest accuracy, with a mean error (ME) of 1.3 W·m-2, an RMSE of 15.9 W·m-2, and a Kling-Gupta Efficiency (KGE) of 0.89, outperforming four major long-term global heat flux datasets, including J-OFURO3, ERA5, MERRA2, and OAFlux. Additionally, we examined the long-term spatiotemporal variability of global ocean evaporation, identifying a significant increasing trend from 1988 to 2010 at a rate of 3.58 mm/yr, followed by a decline at a rate of -2.18 mm/yr from 2010 to 2017. The current dataset provides a new benchmark for the ocean surface energy budget and is expected to be valuable for research on global ocean warming, sea surface-atmosphere energy exchange, the water cycle and climate change. The monthly MEP heat flux dataset for 1988–2017 is publicly available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.26861767.v2 (Yang et al., 2024, last access: 28 August 2024).
- Preprint
(9637 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(5186 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 23 Dec 2024)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-420', Anonymous Referee #1, 17 Oct 2024
reply
This research presents a new global ocean heat flux dataset developed using an innovative energy-balance-based method. The authors introduce a new approach grounded in energy allocation principles, utilizing modified Maximum Entropy Production (MEP) theory to estimate oceanic heat fluxes. The methodology is robust, the calculation process is well-structured, and the dataset is in good accuracy. The paper is well written, and the statistical and geographical analyses are conducted appropriately. The manuscript falls within the scope of the ESSD journal. Minor revisions need to be considered before publication. Please find details below:
Specific comments:
Title and Abstract:
(1) This paper develops a new global ocean heat flux dataset using the MEP framework, incorporating heat storage and Bowen ratio optimizations. I recommend the author designate a representative name for this dataset, such as “Maximum Entropy Production-based Global Ocean Heat Flux (OHF-MEP).”
(2) Line 25, The author should provide a definition of the Bowen ratio upon its first mention to ensure clarity.
(3) Line 27-29, Consider rewording for better clarity. It should be “enhance/improve the model performance”
(4) Lin 29-31, The statement needs to be re-organized for better comprehension. Specifically, accounting for heat storage and adjusting the Bowen ratio were conducted within the MEP model or after the calculations?
Introduction:
(5) This section is well written and organized, it presents the significance of ocean evaporation estimation, the limitations of current bulk methods, the introduction of the MEP method, and the ways to improve the model estimation through Bowen ratio fitting. However, a brief overview of existing ocean heat flux datasets (such as algorithms and accuracy) would help clarify the necessity for developing a new dataset.
(6) Line 49, “A key component of this regulation is ocean evaporation (latent heat)”, “latent heat” is repeated and not necessary.
Methods:
(7) Line 177 and Line 194, Remove the space before “where”.
(8) Line 195, Consider rewording for better clarity. “Thus, the improved MEP model is complemented as…”.
(9) Line 309, “…at different depths with the observed G (derived as Rn-LE-H) (Fig.S1)”, Should it be Table.S1? check and make sure it.
Results:
This section is well organized, followed by the order of the validation of modified MEP method at stations, comparisons of Bowen ratio formulas, evaluation of radiation and heat storage for model input, extended to global scale and analysis of new global estimates. However, additional analysis of spatial pattern variability across two different periods (before and after year 2003) can be considered.
(10) Line 381, “This decision…”, revised as “This choice…”
(11) Line 620 - Line 632, From Fig.12, it seems that ocean ET from most ET datasets increased from 1988-2003, followed by fluctuations during 2003-2010, and then a consistent downward trend from 2010 to 2017. I am interested in the spatial variability for the periods 1988-2003 and 2003-2017, as 2003 appears to be a turning point for evaporation changes. Providing a global spatial plot of ET trends for these two periods could be valuable for detecting spatial variability.
(12) Line 639-642, Fig.12, the author should clarify the meaning of “S=2.31…” in the figure legend.
Conclusions:
(13) I recommend including a brief clarification of the limitations of this research in this section.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-420-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on essd-2024-420', Anonymous Referee #2, 17 Nov 2024
reply
This research presents a new approach to estimating ocean surface heat fluxes using an improved Maximum Entropy Production (MEP) framework. The integration of heat storage effects and empirical Bowen ratio formulas into the MEP model significantly enhances the accuracy of the original MEP theory. Overall, the manuscript is clearly written, and the methodology is well-structured. However, I have several comments below:
- The manuscript does not sufficiently acknowledge the limitations of the proposed method. Including a brief section on limitations would provide a more balanced perspective.
- There is inconsistent use of past and present tense throughout the manuscript, particularly in the methods and results sections. The distinction between past (for methods) and present (for results or general facts) should be thoroughly reviewed and corrected.
Specific Comments:
Title: Consider replacing “optimizations” with a more appropriate term.
Abstract: Briefly explain what the Bowen ratio is, as it is a key concept in the manuscript.
The abstract emphasizes the adjustments to the Bowen ratio but should also explain why accounting for heat storage is critical.
L30: Replace “improve” with “improves”.
L33-L34: Provide more information to justify why the specific values mentioned here are significant.
L42: Revise “the water cycle and climate change” to “water cycle, and climate change”.
L111-L112: Add more background information to explain why investigating the impact of heat storage is important.
L120: Add “and” before “Rnl”.
L122: Replace the period with a semicolon.
L131-L132: Rewrite this sentence for better clarity.
L137: Correct “simulate” to “simulates”.
L145, L177, L194: Remove the unnecessary space before “where”.
L161: This information is redundant and consider removing it.
Subsection 2.3: This section should be reorganized. It primarily describes methods rather than data, which could confuse readers.
L221-L225: this is not quite clear.
L228: Better to include more elaboration of “For instance, the AA method…”.
L326: Replace “exceeds” with “exceeding”.
L331, L339-L341, L359-L360: These sentences should be rewritten to enhance clarity.
L381: Replace “decision” with “selection” or “choice”.
L385: Change “128 other sites” to “other 128 sites”.
L415: Change “closest to” to “were closest to”.
L427-L428: Replace “meters” with “m”.
L437: Change “originates” to “originate” and add “the” before “heat storage”.
L468: Replace “failed” with “fails”.
L474: Capitalize “surface temperature” and italicize “SST”.
Figure 8: Add p-values here as well.
L611-L613: Rewrite this sentence for clarity.
Figure 11: Please confirm the trend legend colors used are consistent with the map colors.
L644: Add “the” before “impact”.
L716: Add “original” before “MEP”.
L724-L726: This transition sentence needs revision for smoother flow.
L734: Add “the” before “major advantage of MEP”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-420-RC2
Data sets
Global ocean latent and sensible heat fluxes from the maximum entropy production framework from 1988-2017 Yong Yang, Huaiwei Sun, and Wenxin Zhang https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.26861767.v2
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
221 | 57 | 9 | 287 | 33 | 5 | 5 |
- HTML: 221
- PDF: 57
- XML: 9
- Total: 287
- Supplement: 33
- BibTeX: 5
- EndNote: 5
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1