[CF-metadata] 6. CF: surface flux versus emissions (Jonathan Gregory)

From: Schultz, Martin <m.schultz>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:57:54 +0100

> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 16:45:57 +0000
> From: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>
> Subject: [CF-metadata] CF: surface flux versus emissions
>
> My question is whether this is the best way to name surface species
fluxes, or should they be
> called tendency of content due to net surface flux. The latter would
be consistent with other
> chemical names, but looks a bit obscure to me - however, either would
work.

Dear Jonathan,

    at this point we might be down to a decision upon what "feels best".
Ad-hoc I would argue that if we know it is due to emission, we should
say so, because it just seems natural. But as soon as some ambiguity is
involved (either because it is a net flux or because the process is not
too well defined) one should use the term (net) surface flux instead. If
we try to converge towards a more systematic way of creating names, then
the somewhat bulgy expression
"tendency_of_X_in_[air|atmosphere]_due_to_net_surface_flux" is probably
best.

    Just out of curiosity: would people agree that for species fluxes
the default would be positive for net emission (i.e. "upward")?

Best regards,

Martin



-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH
52425 Juelich

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Juelich
Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Dueren Nr. HR B 3498
Vorsitzende des Aufsichtsrats: MinDir'in Baerbel Brumme-Bothe
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Achim Bachem (Vorsitzender),
Dr. Ulrich Krafft (stellv. Vorsitzender), Prof. Dr. Harald Bolt,
Dr. Sebastian M. Schmidt
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thu Nov 13 2008 - 08:57:54 GMT