Articles | Volume 22, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-3515-2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-3515-2018
Research article
 | 
28 Jun 2018
Research article |  | 28 Jun 2018

ERA-5 and ERA-Interim driven ISBA land surface model simulations: which one performs better?

Clement Albergel, Emanuel Dutra, Simon Munier, Jean-Christophe Calvet, Joaquin Munoz-Sabater, Patricia de Rosnay, and Gianpaolo Balsamo

Viewed

Total article views: 8,162 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
5,804 2,269 89 8,162 99 113
  • HTML: 5,804
  • PDF: 2,269
  • XML: 89
  • Total: 8,162
  • BibTeX: 99
  • EndNote: 113
Views and downloads (calculated since 05 Apr 2018)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 05 Apr 2018)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 8,162 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 7,347 with geography defined and 815 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 12 Apr 2024
Download
Short summary
ECMWF recently released the first 7-year segment of its latest atmospheric reanalysis: ERA-5 (2010–2016). ERA-5 has important changes relative to ERA-Interim including higher spatial and temporal resolutions as well as a more recent model and data assimilation system. ERA-5 is foreseen to replace ERA-Interim reanalysis. One of the main goals of this study is to assess whether ERA-5 can enhance the simulation performances with respect to ERA-Interim when it is used to force a land surface model.