Lecture 2: Moist stability, convective adjustment, PBL,
RCE
Adam Sobel
Columbia University
ahs129@columbia.edu

December 3, 2013

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 2013

1 / 44

Overview
1

Moist stability

2

Parcel theory

3

CAPE and CIN

4Thermodynamic diagrams5

Dry convective boundary layer over land

6

Moist convective asymmetry and tropical atmospheric structure

7

Radiative-convective equilibrium

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 2013

2 / 44

Our treatment of moist stability follows a mix of Emanuel (1994) and
Bohren and Albrecht.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 20133 / 44

Moist stability, 0
If the air remains unsaturated, then the only effect of water vapor is thevirtual temperature effect. We can define a virtual potential temperature,θv ,p0
θv = Tv ( )Rd /cp ,p
θv is conserved, just as θ is, for dry adiabatic transformations — that is,transformations which are both adiabatic and in which no phase change
occurs. Also just as θ, we can compute density from θ if we know p. The
buoyancy frequency can be shown to be
N2 =

g ∂θv
.
θv ∂z

This is exactly analogous to the dry atmosphere, except θ → θv . Withoutphase change, water vapor just changes the atmospheric composition in aminor way; nothing really new happens.
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 20134 / 44

Moist stability, 1
If the atmosphere is saturated, then θe = θe∗ is a function only of
temperature. To the extent we can neglect condensate effects, θe can beshown to be uniquely related to density (given the pressure). We can thenshow that the stability to small vertical displacements depends on the signof the vertical potential temperature gradient, being stable if
∂θe
> 0,
∂z
unstable for

∂θe
< 0.
∂z
(Essentially the same statements are true substituting moist static energy,h, for θe .)Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 20135 / 44

Moist stability, 2

However once phase change can occur — so the air can neither beassumed entirely saturated nor entirely unsaturated — the picture changes
fundamentally. θv is not conserved under condensation or evaporation,even if reversible. θe or h may be conserved; but we cannot computedensity from either of these alone without also knowing the water vapor
content, r (or q).
This is a fundamental difference between moist and dry convection, and an
irreducible complexity of moist atmospheres: there is no single variablewhich is both conserved and uniquely related to density, given thepressure.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 20136 / 44

Moist stability, 3 - moist adiabatic lapse rate
Consider the adiabatic ascent of a saturated air parcel. What is its
temperature as a function of height? This is called the moist adiabatic
lapse rate. A somewhat long, tedious, and approximate calculation yields(cf. Bohren and Albrecht)
g
1 d ∗
dT
= Γm = − −(r Lv ).
dz
cp
cp dz
With some more work we can get rid of the derivatives,dT
g 1 + Lv r ∗ /RT≈−dz
cp 1 + L2v r ∗ /cp Rv T 2
Note Γd = −g /cp ≈ −10 K/km is the dry adiabatic lapse rate.
Since r ∗ will decrease with height, Γm > Γd (|Γm | < |Γd |).
Near the surface in the tropics, we may have Γm ∼ −5 K/km, while in theupper troposphere r ∗ is very small and Γm ≈ Γd .
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 20137 / 44

Moist stability, 4 - moist adiabatic lapse rate

In reality, the tropical lapse rate is very close to moist adiabiatic,suggesting that it has undergone convective adjustment. Convection has
rendered the profile close to neutral to ascent of a saturated parcel.
This is somewhat analogous to the uniform density in the interior inRayleigh-Benard convection, although we will see that the physics are
actually quite different. In RBC, the homogenization of density occurs
by simple mixing. If that were the case here, we would also expect
humidity to be homogenized, which would lead to saturation on the large
scale. That is not what we find.
(ITCZ soundings here.)

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 20138 / 44

Soundings from E. Pacific ITCZTEPPS experiment, Northern
Summer 1997

Image from Cifelli et al. 2007, Mon. Wea. Rev.,
soundings courtesy Sandra Yuter, NC State

TemperatureLapse Rate, dT/dz-g/cp

Potential Temperature

Specific Humidity

Relative Humidityθe profiles from Caribbean,
and over Amazon

I = suppressed conditions, only shallow cumuli, no rainfall; …
VI = cumulonimbi, stratus decks, heavy showers. Aspliden 1976,
J. App. Meteor., 15, 692-697.
Scala et al. 1990, JGR 95, 17015-17030

Moist stability, 4 - parcel theory 1

Now we are ready to consider a realistic situation. Imagine we have an
unsaturated atmosphere with some profiles T (z), q(z) (or in pressure
coordinates T (p), q(p)). We want to know whether clouds will form. In
general we assume that N 2 > 0 (computed from virtual temperature), so
the atmosphere is stable to small displacements. But for sufficiently large
upward displacements, saturation may occur; then the rules change. Thisis the notion of conditional stability.
We use the parcel method. Compute the buoyancy of a hypothetical parcel
undergoing some specific finite displacement. We will generally neglect
both the virtual temperature effect and the effect of condensate on density.
Since we compute only buoyancy, we are also neglecting pressure forces.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 20139 / 44

Moist stability, 5 - parcel theory 2
Start with an unsaturated parcel which has the properties of the large-scale
environment. As it ascends, it will cool adiabatically, conserving θ (or s) as
the pressure drops hydrostatically, thus following the dry adiabatic lapse
rate. Water vapor mixing ratio r is conserved. At some point, the actual
temperature will reach the point at which r = r ∗ , and the parcel will besaturated. This is called the lifted condensation level (LCL).
If the sounding is stable to dry displacements (dT /dz > Γd ) the parcel will
be negatively buoyant at the LCL.
If it continues to rise (forced somehow), it will do so at the moist adiabatic
lapse rate. If the sounding lapse rate is steeper (more negative) than moist
adiabatic (often the case near the surface), the parcel buoyancy will
become less negative with height. The point at which it reaches zero is
the level of free convection (LFC).
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201310 / 44

Moist stability, 5 - parcel theory 3
Above the LFC, the parcel is positively buoyant and rises freely. Water
continues to condense. (Assume the parcel does not mix with theenvironment. This is generally an unrealistic assumption and we will return
to it.)The parcel’s temperature will follow the moist adiabatic lapse rate. At
some point (the stratosphere if nowhere else) the parcel will again become
cooler than its environment and thus negatively buoyant. This is the levelof neutral buoyancy (LNB).
We often assume parcel ascent stops at the LNB, although it is reasonable
to expect some overshoot, since the parcel will have some momentum
when it arrives there.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201311 / 44

Moist stability, 6 - CAPE
We define the convective available potential energy (CAPE) for aparcel starting at level zi as the integral of the buoyancy over the entire
region where it is positive:
Z z=LNBCAPE (zi ) =Z LNB
Bdz = g

z=LFC

LFC

ρ̃ − ρcdz
ρ̃where ρc is the density of the parcel (”c” for cloud) and ρ̃ is the density ofthe environmental air. In pressure coordinates, using hydrostatic balance
for the environment d p̃/dz = −ρ̃g ,Z pLFCCAPE (pi ) =(αc − α̃)dp.
pLNB

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201312 / 44

Moist stability, 6.5 - CAPEThe CAPE is the total potential energy available to the parcel throughbuoyant ascent (as its name suggests). If we assume this is all converted
to kinetic energy, then it tells us the upward speed of the parcel at the topof its ascent.
1 2w= CAPE ,2 max
orwmax = (2CAPE )1/2 .
We call this velocity wmax because it is not just the maximum value overthe entire ascent, but also really an upper bound on that quantity.
Pressure forces or mixing of momentum may reduce it, and entrainment ofenvironmental air will in general reduce the buoyancy itself (thoughsometimes not).

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201313 / 44

Moist stability, 7 - CIN
We also define the convective inhibition (CIN) for a parcel starting at
level zi as the integral of the buoyancy over the entire region where it isnegative, from zi to the LFC:
Z z=LFC
CIN(zi ) = −Z z=LFC
Bdz = g

zi

or

zi

ρc − ρ̃dz
ρ̃Z pI(α̃ − αc )dp.

CIN(pi ) =pLFC

For both CAPE and CIN, the dependence on zi (or pi ) is not just atechnicality, but strongly influences the value — surface parcels, forexample, are often much more buoyant than those just a few hundred
meters above the surface. The results will also depend quantitatively on
the thermodynamic assumptions (e.g., reversible vs. pseudo-adiabatic). It
will also be important to consider entrainment.
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201314 / 44

Moist stability, 8 - skew-T
Numerical computations of CAPE and CIN are useful, but meteorologists
also rely heavily on graphical methods for assessing the state of theatmosphere. Two kinds of diagrams we will use are skew-T log-pdiagrams, and conserved variable diagrams.
A skew-T log-p diagram has several non-orthogonal axes. The vertical axis
is the logarithm of pressure. The isotherms, or lines of constanttemperature, slope from lower left to upper right. Typically thetemperature, T , and dew point, Td are plotted; if T = Td then the air issaturated. Dry adiabats - curves of constant potential temperature, θ,slope from lower right to upper left; moist adiabats (usually actually
pseudo-adiabatic) are also shown, nearly vertical at bottom and thencurving to the left. Lines of constant water vapor mixing ratio are also
shown in the lower part of the plot (sloping up to the right, steeper than
the isotherms).
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201315 / 44

From skew-t.com

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201316 / 44

Online skew-T lessons:Weather Underground skew-T log-p lesson
Millersville University skew-T log-p lesson
UCAR COMET skew-T log-p lesson (requires login)

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201317 / 44

Schematic skew-T (Bohren and Albrecht)

Bohren and Albrecht: Atmospheric Thermodynamics,
Oxford University Press, New York, pp.306

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201318 / 44

Exercise: where are the LNB and LFC, for parcels starting at the surface
and at 850 hPa?

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201319 / 44

Answer:

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201320 / 44

On a skew-T diagram, if there is a region of buoyant ascent — parcel T
greater than environmental T — the CAPE is related to the area
between the two curves.
CIN is related to the ”negative area”, of the region for which parcel T isless than environmental T .

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201321 / 44

Moist stability, 9 - conserved variable diagrams
Consider a saturated parcel in an unsaturated environment. Let θec be theparcel equivalent potential temperature (reversible) and θ˜e∗ be thesaturation equivalent potential temeprature of the environment. (Note θ˜e∗depends only on T and p). We can show (Bohren and Albrecht p. 297;
somewhat different notation) thatθc − θ̃ ≈θec − θ˜e∗1+βwhere β = (Lv /cp )∂r ∗ /∂T is of order 1. Thus if we neglect condensate
loading and other effects, parcel buoyancy is roughly proportional to thedifference between parcel θe and environmental θe∗ . A similar result can beshown for parcel moist static energy h and environmental saturation moist
static energy h∗ .
This motivates conserved variable diagrams, in which we plot θe and θe∗(or h and h∗ ) as a function of height.
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201322 / 44

Exercise: is this sounding conditionally unstable?

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201323 / 44

Answer: yes, to shallow convection.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201324 / 44

Conserved variables and mixing in clouds, 1Conserved variables can be helpful when studying details of cloud
processes.
Consider a mixture of two parcels, with proportions M and 1 − M. Let ξ
be any linearly mixing conserved quantity, its values in the two parcels areξ1 , ξ2 . The mixture has ξ = Mξ1 + (1 − M)ξ2 . If we make a scatter plotof two such conserved variables on which each point is a different fluid
sample, they will fall along a line if all are mixtures of the same two end
members, just with different values of M.
In non-precipitating cumulus clouds, one can assume that equivalentpotential temperature θe and total water qT are conserved.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201325 / 44

Conserved variables and mixing in clouds, 2

From Paluch (1979, J. Atmos. Sci.)
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201326 / 44

Conserved variables and mixing in clouds, 3

From Paluch (1979, J. Atmos. Sci.)
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201327 / 44

Conserved variables and mixing in clouds, 4Now consider a buoyant saturated parcel rising in a cloud updraft throughan unsaturated environment.
If the parcel is rising it implies that θe of the parcel is greater than θe∗ ofthe environment (and thus also greater than θe of the environment sinceθe ≤ θe∗ ). If environmental air is mixed into the parcel, its θe will be
reduced, as will its buoyancy.
In tropical clouds over ocean, buoyancy is generally small and the
reduction due to mixing is due to the subsaturation, rather thantemperature deficit, of the environment. Mixing in of dry air causes
condensate to evaporate, cooling the parcel. This effect is stronger, for agiven entrainment rate, the drier is the environment.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201328 / 44

Conserved variables and mixing in clouds, 5This effect is important in the atmosphere — most convective clouds
entrain significantly through the sides (Paluch 1979 notwithstanding).
Non-entraining parcel theory gives only an upper bound on cloud
buoyancy.
Arakawa and Schubert (1974) based their convection scheme on a ”cloudwork function”, a CAPE-like quantity that accounts for entrainment.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201329 / 44

We now begin to describe more directly the properties of convecting
atmospheres. We start with the dry convective boundary layer. Most
common over land, this is a layer with turbulence driven by surface heatingin which condensation does not occur. It differs from Rayleigh-Benard
convection most importantly in that there is no upper boundary, and thatthe free atmosphere above the convecting layer is stably stratified.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201330 / 44

Dry convective boundary layer over land, 1
At night, if the atmosphere is dry, the surface cools faster than the land,by radiation to space. The night-time boundary layer becomes stable ∂θv /∂z > 0.

Stull, 1988: An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology,
Kluwer Academic Press, pp.16

From Stull, ch. 9 of latest edition of Wallace & Hobbs.
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201331 / 44

Dry convective boundary layer over land, 2
When the sun comes out the surface heats up, destabilizing a layer justabove ground. Convective turbulent mixing homogenizes θv over a deeper
and deeper layer.
Stull, 1988: An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology,
Kluwer Academic Press, pp.17

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201332 / 44

Dry convective boundary layer over land, 3
The well-developed daytime boundary layer has uniform θv with height,
between an unstable surface layer whose depth is controlled by roughness(or over a purely smooth surface, diffusion) and an inversion where themixed layer meets the stable free atmosphere.

Stull, 1988: An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology,
Kluwer Academic Press, pp.13

From Stull, ch. 9 of latest edition of Wallace & Hobbs.
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201333 / 44

Dry convective boundary layer over land, 4
How is this similar to or different from Rayleigh-Benard convection?
There is a conserved buoyancy variable (here θv ) whose mean profile
becomes uniform with height, apart from thin layers near theboundaries. (similar)
The dominant eddies have horizontal scales comparable to the depthof the layer. (similar)
One key difference derives from the inversion at the top. Turbulent
eddies mix free-atmospheric air with high θv down into the boundary
layer - this is entrainment. At the inversion, the net heat flux ρw θv
is downwards; it is roughly proportional to the surface flux of θv ,proportionality constant ∼ 0.2.
Humidity also becomes well-mixed. As the PBL deepens, temperature
at its top (just below the inversion) becomes lower. Eventuallycondensation may occur, and clouds form — another different
phenomenon not found in RBC!
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201334 / 44

Dry convective boundary layer over land, 5

From Tennekes, 1973, J. Atmos. Sci.
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201335 / 44

Moist convective asymmetry and tropical atmosphericstructure, 1

We now need to discuss perhaps the most fundamental difference between
moist cumulus convection and dry convection. This is the asymmetry
between updrafts and downdrafts.
In unsaturated conditionally unstable atmospheres, surface- or near-surface
parcels which start with the thermodynamic properties of the large-scale
environment can undergo free ascent after reaching the LCL.
However, the free troposphere is almost always stably stratified to dry
displacements, ∂θv /∂z > 0 — thus unconditionally stable to downward
displacements of free-tropospheric air.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201336 / 44

Moist convective asymmetry and tropical atmosphericstructure, 2Condensate can lead to negatively buoyant downdrafts - by condensate
evaporation and direct loading. But an unsaturated parcel will not
experience any such effects, so they are limited to the immediate vicinityof updrafts which produce clouds and rain.
So updrafts from the surface can develop spontaneously in an
unsaturated atmosphere, given a little forcing; downdrafts from aloft
cannot.
As a consequence, cumulus convection — moist convection driven by freebuoyant ascent — occurs via ascent in concentrated regions, while descent
is more broadly distributed.
(NB: an exception to this, as we will see is the marine stratocumulus
boundary layer, which in some ways is more similar to dry convection.)
Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201337 / 44

Moist convective asymmetry and tropical atmosphericstructure, 3

Consider a cumulus cloud as a localized heat source in a dry, stably
stratified atmosphere. Consider linear response to instantaneous switch-on(Bretherton and Smolarkiewicz 1989, J. Atmos. Sci.)
Remote atmosphere warms by compensating descent, communicatedoutwards by internal gravity wave front.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201338 / 44

Moist convective asymmetry and tropical atmosphericstructure, 4Bretherton and Smolarkiewicz
1989, J. Atmos. Sci.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201339 / 44

Moist convective asymmetry and tropical atmosphericstructure, 5

So heat can be transported over large distances without material transportof fluid over those distances. Moisture, on the other hand, must bematerially transported.
So the natural end state of a nonrotating atmosphere with a steadycumulus cloud is a moist adiabiatic temperature profile (no buoyancy
difference from cloud itself) and unsaturated moisture profile.
Planetary rotation will limit the scale of this convective adjustment, but
is weak in the tropics. (Adjustment in a rotating atmosphere to an initial
density anomaly is called geostrophic adjustment.

Adam Sobel (Columbia)

Lecture 2

December 3, 201340 / 44

Radiative-convective
equilibrium and zerodimensional climate physics
Adam Sobel

Radiative vs. radiative-convective
equilibria (dry and moist)

Manabe and Strickler 1964, J. Atmos. Sci. 21, 361-385.

• In pure radiative equilibrium, the troposphere is highly
unstable to convection (dry or moist)• Convective adjustment to a specified lapse rate is assumed• Constant relative humidity• Specified trace gas concentrations as in earth’s atmosphere• Convection cools the surface; moist cools it more (why?)

Manabe and Strickler 1964, J. Atmos. Sci. 21, 361-385.

Calculations with Kerry Emanuelʼs singlecolumn model, Renno et al., JGR, 1994
• Convective and (clear-sky) radiation
parameterizations• Slab ocean mixed layer• Annual average insolation• CO2, Ozone at reasonable values• Surface wind speed=7 m/s• Surface albedo tuned to give reasonableclimate near equatorTemperature

Pretty near moist adiabiatic(trust me)

Specific humidity

Relative humidity(this result very sensitive to details of convective parameterization)

Moist static energyRad-conv. equilibrium temperature as afunction of latitude, annual average radiation

Albedo tuned to give ~realistic sounding at equator. Notex axis only goes to 45 degrees, already well below freezing at surface.

RCE predicts:• Height of the tropopause• As climate warms, relative humidity ~constant; q increases as q* (ClausiusClapeyron)• Precipitation must equal evaporation;
Precipitation plus sensible heat flux must
equal net radiative cooling• These latter two allow us to understandsome basic aspects of global warmingClimate models predict that water vapor increases as
Clausius-Clapeyron (~7.5%/K), but precipitation much more slowly% column water vapor change% precipitation change

Global mean surface air temperature change

Held and Soden 2006, J. Climate 19, 5686

% column water vapor change % precipitation change
Held and Soden 2006,
J. Climate 19, 5686

Global mean surface air temperature change• Why is this?
• Relative humidity stays ~ constant; water vapor content islimited by saturation – even where the atmosphere is very
subsaturated• Precipitation cannot increase with water vapor because it isconstrained by energetics. It can increase only as fast as
atmospheric radiative cooling (and surface evaporation) can.
These statements are only true globally. Locally, transports
are important and precipitation changes can be much larger.

References 1• Arakawa, A., Schubert, W. H., 1974: Interaction of a Cumulus Cloud
Ensemble with the Large-Scale Environment, Part I. J. Atmos. Sci., 31, 674–
701.
• Aspliden, C. I., 1976: A Classification of the Structure of the TropicalAtmosphere and Related Energy Fluxes. J. Appl. Meteor., 15, 692–697.
• Bohren, C. F., Albrecht, B. A.: Atmospheric Thermodynamics. Oxford
University Press, New York.
• Bretherton, C. S., Smolarkiewicz, P. K., 1989: Gravity Waves,
Compensating Subsidence and Detrainment around Cumulus Clouds. J.
Atmos. Sci., 46, 740–759.
• Cifelli, R., Nesbitt, S. W., Rutledge, S. A., Petersen, W. A., Yuter, S., 2007:
Radar Characteristics of Precipitation Features in the EPIC and TEPPS
Regions of the East Pacific. Mon. Wea. Rev., 135, 1576–1595.
• Emanuel, K. A., 1994: Atmospheric Convection. Oxford U. P., New York.
• Held, I. M., Soden, B. J., 2006: Robust Responses of the Hydrological Cycle
to Global Warming. J. Climate, 19, 5686–5699.

References 2• Manabe, S., Strickler, R. F., 1964: Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmospherewith a Convective Adjustment. J. Atmos. Sci., 21, 361–385.
• Paluch, I. R., 1979: The Entrainment Mechanism in Colorado Cumuli. J.
Atmos. Sci., 36, 2467–2478.
• Rennó, N. O., Emanuel, K. A., Stone, P. H.:Radiative-convective model withan explicit hydrologic cycle: 1. Formulation and sensitivity to model
parameters. J . Geophys. Res., 99, 14429-14441.
• Scala, J. R., Garstang, M., Tao, W-k, Pickering, K. E., Thompson, A. M.,
Simpson, J., Kirchhoff, V. W. J. H., Browell, E. V., Sachse, G. W., Torres, A. L.,
Gregory, G. L., Rasmussen, R. A., Khalil, M. A. K., 1990: Cloud draft
structure and trace gas transport. J. Geophys. Res., 95, 17015–17030.
• Stevens, B., 2006: Bulk boundary-layer concepts for simplified models of
tropical dynamics. Theor. Comp. Fluid Dyn. 20:5-6, 279-304.
• Stull, R. B., 1988: An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology. Kluwer
Academic Publishers.

References 3• Tennekes, H., 1973: A Model for the Dynamics of the Inversion Above a
Convective Boundary Layer. J. Atmos. Sci., 30, 558–567.
• Wallace, J. M., Hobbs, P. V.: Atmospheric science - an introductory survey.
New York, NY (USA): Academic Press, 467 p.