A note on the two Global Energy Budget readings:

 For those of you with fewer climate courses under your belt, these two readings may pose a bit of a challenge!  But give them a try and focus on the big picture:  the complexity of the task of trying to estimate all the components of the balance, and how this is done – including some components that are estimated solely on the basis of the need for the whole thing to balance!    You may find the Trenberth et al. (2009) article somewhat easier to understand, but slogging through the Kiehl & Trenberth (1997) paper first will provide more depth.  

 The Trenberth et al. (2009) article includes information on latitudinal and land-ocean differences in some of the components, which is more germane to our class.

 Also in the 2009 paper, you will find a few comments about the bias in some of the data that came from the NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis (NRA):  e.g., “The NRA has a known bias in much too high surface albedo over the oceans . . .” (p 15).  You may find these comments useful when you are doing Exercise #1 because all the animations are based on the NRA.

 Lastly, a careful reading of the 2009 paper will explain where the adjustments in the new values on the 2009 budget figure came from and where the greatest uncertainties remain.

---------------------------

 P.S.  For anyone who would like a more basic explanation of the energy balance and its components, see the following pdf of a presentation I give in my “Introduction to Global Change” class:

 The Earth’s Energy Balance  [pdf]

 The presentation includes THIS LINK to a simple animation of the energy balance.