GISS Model 3 Development

1
GISS Model 3 Development

• D. Rind
• NASA/GISS

2
Active Areas of Development

• Dynamic Ocean
• Sea Ice Dynamics
• Finer Horizontal Resolution
• Finer Vertical Resolution
• Clouds and Convection
• Parallelization

3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
Ocean Development

• Finer horizontal resolution
• Better regional simulation
• Variable horizontal resolution
• lt1 in tropics and at poles 2-3 at mid-lat
• To capture ENSO events
• Better depiction of polar processes

9
Sea Ice Modeling

• Inclusion of modified Zhang et al. shearing
  stress terms for sea ice dynamics
• Utilizing Russell approach
• Reduces speed of sea ice advection out of the
  Arctic

10
Impact of Model Resolutionon Tracer Transports

• Increased Horizontal Resolution
• Similar inter- and intra-hemispheric resolution
• Similar vertical transport in troposphere and
  trop/strat exchange (except at high N. Lat.)
• Increased Vertical Resolution
• Faster interhemispheric transport
• Slower strat/trop exchange older age of air in
  stratosphere, less leaky stratospheric tropical
  pipe
• Both Increased Vertical and Horizontal Resolution
• Added tropical EKE, effects on interhemispheric
  transport and trop/strat exchange

11
Finer Horizontal Resolution Currently running 1
x 1 model (53, 102 layers)
12
Finer Vertical Resolution

• QBO obtained with 102 layers (and added
  directions for gravity wave drag)
• Also running 150 layer model
• (Both with tops at the mesopause)
• Note Finer horizontal without finer vertical
  produces little impact on trace transports

13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
Clouds and ConvectionA. Del Genio

• Explicit Updraft Calculation for deep convection
• Explicit Downdraft Calculation (later)
• Cumulus Anvil Dynamics (later)

16
GCM cumulus updraft speed diagnosis based on
Gregory (2001)
Observed (Zipser and Lutz 1994)
GCM
Combined with Marshall-Palmer DSD and empirical
size-fallspeed relations for liquid/graupel/ice,
allows for interactive estimates of convective
precipitation efficiency and effect on anvil
cloud feedback
17
Stronger thunderstorms and tornadoes in a warmer
climate
Most lightning is over land, where surface is
warmest
Severe storms and tornadoes occur when strong
updrafts combine with strong winds aloft (wind
shear)
?
Change in of storms in 5 yrs, current to warmer
climate

TRMM LIS OTD lightning flash rates used to
evaluate model predictions of storm strength
Stronger updrafts near freezing level imply
lightning will occur 10 more often in storms in
a warmer climate
0C warmer climate
?
FEWER STORMS MORE STORMS
? 0C current climate
Strong updrafts will occur more often with strong
wind shear in a warmer climate, i.e., there will
be more of the strongest tornadoes
Del Genio et al. (2007), submitted to
Geophysical Research Letters
18
Parallelization

• Goal To allow Model 3 to be run on distributed
  memory machines (in addition to shared memory)
• Attempts High Performance Fortran
• Speed-up not impressive
• Cluster Open MP
• Negotiating with GSFC to buy it (not optimistic)
• MPI
• Starting with the dynamics

19
Comparison of Tracer Transports

• Meteorology
• Interhemispheric Transport
• Intrahemispheric Transport
• Vertical Mixing within the Troposphere
• Transport from the Troposphere to the
  Stratosphere
• Transport from the Stratosphere to the
  Troposphere
• Transport within the Stratosphere

20
On-line Tracers

• CO2, CH4, N2O, CFC-11, SF6, Rn222, Bomb 14C, and
  O3
• Sources as specified in previous papers
• Stratospheric chemistry from LINOZ (CH4, N2O,
  CFC-11, O3)
• Tropospheric chemistry Prather (CH4), Mickley
  (O3)
• Simulations run two ways with and without
  stratospheric tracer O3 influencing the radiation
• 12 year runs (nominally)

21
(No Transcript)
22
Results Meteorology

• Temperature
• In the coarser vertical resolution models, S.H.
  lower stratosphere polar region not cold enough
  in winter, too cold in summer
• F102 slightly too cold at tropical tropopause
• Zonal wind
• For Dec-Feb, spread in observations of the
  strength of the stratospheric jet makes
  comparisons difficult
• In most models (not M23) stratospheric summer
  easterlies are somewhat weak
• Specific humidity
• Water vapor minimum at tropical hygropause is too
  low in some models (varies depending on whether
  interactiveor not)
• Water vapor in mesosphere is too large
  (parameterized CH4-gtH20)

23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
Interhemispheric Transport

• Difference in hemispheric concentration divided
  by transport across the equator (corrected for
  percentage of source in SH (8 for SF6 and CFC11,
  1 for CH4)
• Range of a factor of two F102 the quickest, E23
  the longest (Model E values are longer in
  general)
• In Model 3, quicker transports with finer
  vertical resolution horizontal resolution has
  little effect on transport times
• Model studies have found IHT produced 2/3 by
  eddies M53 a bit closer to this value
• Model 3 has both greater tropical eddy energy and
  stronger June-August Hadley Cell intensity both
  associated with greater tropical precipitation
  over land _at_18N in that season (especially the
  finer grid models) in general, ratio of tropical
  precip over land/ocean is less in Model E
• Upper-level convective divergent outflow has been
  suggested as the principal mechanism of IHT
  Prather et al., 1987 Hartley and Black, 1995,
  including convection over land regions (e.g.,
  Amazon, equatorial Africa, India) (Lintner,
  2003). The proportion of total vertical transport
  above 500mb associated with moist convection (as
  opposed to large-scale transport) is 60-70 in
  M53, F53, and F102 it is 54 in M23, and about
  45 in E20 and E23. Another reason therefore for
  the longer IHT times in Model E is its reduced
  relative effectiveness of convective transports.

26
Observed values 0.7 to 1.8, but 3D values in
model intercomparisons (SF6)are 0.81?0.2. NCEP
reanalysis winds with MATCH Model (CFC11) give
0.8 (3D value). Observed interannual variability
5-6.
27

• Observed contribution to ITH 2/3 by eddies
• Observed June-Aug Hadley Cell magnitude
  190-270(109kgs-1)
• June-Aug Land Precip
• Central America N. India
• Observed 6-10mmd-1 8-10mmd-1
• Model 3 6-10mmd-1 6-10mmd-1
• Model E 3-6 mmd-1 6- 8mmd-1(E20 lower value)

28
Intrahemispheric Transport

• The mixing within each hemisphere is primarily a
  function of eddy transports from the mid-latitude
  sources, with subsequent involvement of the mean
  circulation. The standard deviation between the
  models of the eddy kinetic energy in the N.H.
  troposphere is 6
• Mid-latitude/equatorial ratio For CFC-11
  tracer, all the models produce a ratio between
  the mid-latitude and equatorial region
  concentrations of 1.10-1.14. Observed values for
  this ratio covering the analogous time period for
  the 1980s are 1.10 (Kaye et al., 1994). Observed
  values for the SF6 ratio in the marine boundary
  layer are similar (1.06) (Denning et al., 1999),
  while ratios for Kr85 are again of similar
  magnitude (1.16) (Jacob et al., 1987)
• NH Mid-latitude/high latitude ratio, all the
  models produce similar values at the surface of
  1.07?0.01, which is slightly higher than
  indicated by the sparse observations shown in
  Denning et al. (1999) (1.02) for an Atlantic
  transact during two months. In the N.H., the
  similarity in EKE leads to similar
  intrahemispheric mixing properties in all the
  models
• In the Southern Hemisphere, most of the models
  have similar magnitudes of EKE except for F102,
  which has about 15-20 more
• SH Mid-latitude/high latitude Some variation
  among the models but not consistent from tracer
  to tracer. Observations show little extratropical
  gradient in the S.H. for SF6 and CO2 (Denning et
  al., 1999 NOAA CMDL sampling network
  http//cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/cmdl-flask/cmdl-
  flask.html) for which all the models show only
  small gradients
• Overall, 4x5 versions of Model 3 have slightly
  better (hence less) variation between the tropics
  and extratropics in the two hemispheres, while
  Model E has the largest.

29
(No Transcript)
30
Vertical Mixing Within the Troposphere (I)

• For 222Rn Model E has lower values 500-300mb,
  where F102 has most
• Model E has higher values 200-100mb, where F102
  has least
• In all the models, both large-scale vertical
  transport and moist convection remove 222Rn from
  the region below 800mb. The large-scale transport
  dominates in lifting 222Rn up to about 500mb,
  then convective transport dominates above,
  although both are generally positive throughout.
  The large-scale vertical transport is greater by
  eddy transports than by the mean circulation
  (which is slow given 5 day e-folding time)
• The differences that arise in the vertical
  profiles are thus due to differences in eddy and
  convective processes
• The reduced values in Model E in the 500-300mb
  region are primarily due to smaller vertical eddy
  convergences, while the higher values at levels
  above 200mb result from both eddy and convective
  effects. These differences are not due to
  differences in convection overall, just over
  land, where model E convection extends to
  somewhat greater heights.
• Model E convective fluxes maximize at a lower
  altitude (900mb) than in Model 3 (800mb), and
  this profile does affect the convective removal,
  which follows the distribution of mass flux.
• For F102, the higher values from 500-300mb are
  due to convective transports, as are the reduced
  values at levels above 200mb.

31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
Observations for Dec-Feb show EKE fairly close to
the general model average upper troposphere
tropical EKE may be too high in F102
34

• Mahowald et al. (1997) used the MATCH model with
  winds provided by NCEP and ECMWF. In the Northern
  Hemisphere, the ratio of concentration at 300mb
  to that at the surface at upper mid-latitudes
  varied from 20 (NCEP winds) to 12 (ECMWF data).
  The finer resolution models used here (M53, F53,
  F102) all had ratios close to 13, close to the
  ECMWF value, while the values with the coarser
  resolution models were lower (M23, 9.7 E23,
  9.2 and E20, 7.1).
• However, the MATCH model over-predicted the upper
  troposphere values in comparison with specific
  observations, by about 2.5 if one were to apply
  that to the simulations in general, it would
  reduce the observed ratio to 5-8 (assuming the
  source was not similarly overpredicted), more in
  line with the lower vertical resolution models
• Results are very sensitive to model convection
  schemes (Mahowald et al. ,1997). The GCMs
  discussed here all use a generally similar
  scheme, hence their results do not differ as much
  from one another as have occurred in other model
  comparisons (e.g., IPCC, 1994).

35
Vertical Mixing within the Troposphere
(II)Boundary layer processes

• Seasonal variation Only F102 has max in summer,
  as in the observations for Chester, Pa., with
  accurate maximum values
• Other seasonal variations at mid-latitudes are
  different
• Diurnal variations are similar in the different
  models
• Peak values do not depend on vertical (or
  horizontal) resolution nor on these model physics
  differences
• Boundary layer heights (peak or minimum values)
  do not depend primarily on resolution
• There is some increase in surface wind velocity
  with finer resolution, primarily horizontal but
  also vertical to some extent. Even here, however,
  the different details of the boundary layer
  formulation in Model E are apparent, as this
  model has higher velocities over land, but lower
  over many ocean grid boxes, again independent of
  vertical resolution issues.

36
(No Transcript)
37
Dashed lines are observations (Prather and Jacob,
1990)
38
(No Transcript)
39
Rn222
40
(No Transcript)
41
Transport from the Troposphere into the
Stratosphere (I)

• The ratio between their tropospheric and
  stratospheric burden is a measure of the
  transport from the lower to the upper region
• The model E runs tend to have higher
  stratospheric concentrations, indicating faster
  transport from the troposphere to stratosphere
• The relative effect is the same with all the
  species, but in absolute value, it is largest
  with CFC-11 and SF6, and smaller with CH4 and
  N2O. When the stratospheric sink is at lower
  levels in the stratosphere, as in the case of
  CFC-11 (whose peak chemical destruction in the
  different vertical resolution models occurs
  between 28 and 43 mb), the increased flux from
  the troposphere is relatively rapidly destroyed.
  When the sink is at higher levels, there is more
  time for the species to be advected horizontally,
  and back down into the troposphere, minimizing
  the difference between the model simulations. For
  SF6, the higher model E values are due to the
  rapidly increasing source, which prevents the
  return flux from stabilizing the distribution.
• Vertical transport through 100mb finer
  resolution models have less transport or even
  negative values right near the equator
• In the troposphere and extending up to 150mb, the
  vertical velocity distribution is dominated by
  the surface characteristics, with rising air over
  the continents, sinking air over the eastern
  parts of the oceans, and rising air over the
  western Pacific. This effect is common to all
  the models.

42
(No Transcript)
43
Value estimated from CH4 observations 8.9
44
(No Transcript)
45
Transport from the Troposphere into the
Stratosphere (II)

• There is a further tendency for sinking air to
  occur in the stratosphere (80mb) above the
  region of extensive rising motion from the
  western Pacific again this occurs in all the
  models.
• However, in the finer resolution models, this
  sinking extends down to the 100mb level in the
  western Pacific, especially in F102, while in the
  coarser resolution models it does not. It is this
  difference in vertical velocity over the western
  Pacific that is the primary reason for the
  differences in vertical transport seen in the
  equatorial region
• Observations have shown that the 100mb region is
  the level for which temperature variations of
  opposite sign occur in the western Pacific region
  with warming below, there is cooling above and
  vice versa
• The annual 100mb temperatures are colder above
  the western Pacific in F102 (83C) than in E23
  (-81C) and E20 (-79C), and the subsidence may
  be in response to the cooling that has produced
  the colder air.
• With the greater eddy energy in F102, there is
  greater cooling due to eddy energy divergence
  (-0.6Cd-1) compared to E23 (0.0Cd-1) and E20
  (-0.1Cd-1) which had the least energy M53, with
  the next most eddy energy, had the next higher
  eddy energy divergence (-0.4Cd-1) in F53 it was
  0.3C d-1, and intermediate amounts of
  subsidence and reduced vertical transport

46
(No Transcript)
47
Transport from the Troposphere into the
Stratosphere (III)

• Another factor influencing the net vertical
  transport is the transport downward back into the
  troposphere in the vicinity of the subtropical
  jet.
• The result in E23 is quite anomalous compared to
  the other models, with very strong downward and
  upward transports in the vicinity of the jet. It
  is associated with an oscillation in the mean
  circulation (it does not show up in the eddy
  transports), and extends throughout the
  troposphere. It appears to be the result of the
  gravity wave drag parameterization, which has a
  similar variation, its impact oscillating with
  latitude, and resulting in alternating
  convergences and divergences.
• Even averaging out the oscillations, E23 has
  considerably larger downward SF6 transport in the
  vicinity of the subtropical jets, to balance its
  increased vertical transport through the
  equatorial region.

48
(No Transcript)
49
Transport From the Stratosphere into the
Troposphere

• The observed residence time of bomb 14C (linear
  fit to the logarithmic fall-off with time) varied
  with duration from the bomb release as the time
  from the explosion increased, the atmospheric
  circulation was able to transport material to
  higher levels in the stratosphere
• F102 is the most realistic, and model E runs the
  least realistic (interactive runs do better)
• Finer grid models have smallest net transport of
  ozone from strat into trop
• Longer residence time with greater reduction of
  eddy energy with altitude in the upper trop/lower
  strat - greater reduction with finer resolution
  (less upward energy flux also better resolution
  of the fall-off with height)
• Model E also has a significant component of
  downward transport due to the mean circulation
  (gravity-wave drag-induced).
• Differences also apply to flux of O3 into the
  stratosphere - finer resolution (and interactive)
  models produce reduced fluxes, and better
  comparison with radiosonde data in the
  troposphere (though all models still too high at
  high latitudes).
• The model 3 simulations give slightly larger
  downward ozone transports in the Northern
  Hemisphere as in observations (e.g., Olsen et
  al., 2004), while in model E the transports are
  somewhat larger in the Southern Hemisphere. This
  is due to greater downward eddy transport of
  ozone at S.H. mid-latitudes associated with the
  large gravity wave dissipative effects in the
  N.H. in model E.

50
(No Transcript)
51

• Observed short--term (36 month) residence time 4
  years
• Observed longer term residence time (90 months)
  5 years
• Observed transport of ozone 400-600 (as high as
  800)Tg/yr NOTE observations are through the
  tropopause, values here are through 117 mb

52
(No Transcript)
53
(No Transcript)
54
(No Transcript)
55
Transport Within the Stratosphere

• Age of air calculated by correlation with SF6
  increase at the surface or in the upper
  troposphere.
• E20 has the youngest air in the upper
  stratosphere, influenced by the presence of the
  model top.
• In general, the finest resolution models have the
  oldest age of air throughout the middle
  atmosphere.
• In the middle stratosphere, E23 has the flattest
  distribution, indicative of the most leaky
  tropospheric pipe
• The finer resolution models have less leaky
  tropical pipes, while the Model E values are more
  leaky. This can be related at least partly to the
  gravity wave drag parameterization in model E (or
  Rayleigh friction in E20), which in the lower
  stratosphere (including the subtropics) is 10x
  stronger than that in Model 3 when acting on a
  west wind, the drag forces a poleward flow which
  helps mix air out of the tropical pipe region
• At 45 mb, Model 3 values are generally better
  than the models used for the MMII comparison.
• Interactive models have older (and more
  realistic) age of air values (as much as 50
  older in the S.H., 30 in the N.H.

56
(No Transcript)
57
(No Transcript)
58
(No Transcript)
59
(No Transcript)
60
(No Transcript)
61
(No Transcript)
62
Interactive Runs

• Differ in O3 because LINOZ does not have O3-hole
  parameterization
• Hence they have less O3 in lower stratosphere
• Warmer temperatures, and stronger summer east
  winds, are improvements relative to normal model
  simulations
• Increased stability reduces tropospheric EKE by a
  few , reduced upward EP flux into the
  stratosphere of 10-15, and a reduction in
  stratospheric EKE by 20-30 between 100 and 10mb
• This leads to a reduction in EP flux convergence
  of 20-30 and reduced stratospheric residual
  circulation - less upward flux through the
  tropics, less downward flux at high latitudes as
  well as older age of air
• Effect is felt more strongly in the S.H.

63
(No Transcript)
64
(No Transcript)
65
(No Transcript)
66
(No Transcript)
67
(No Transcript)
68
(No Transcript)
69
Step-Mountain Technique Applied to an Atmospheric
C-grid Model, or How to Improve Precipitation
Near MountainsGary L. Russell, Revised for
Monthly Weather Review, 2007/01/10

• Variable Number of Vertical Layers fitting
  between
• bottom topography and model top
• Step-mountain is best implemented on C-grid
• Reduces systematic horizontal advection errors
• Which reduces erroneous vertical mass fluxes
• Which improves precipitation distribution
• Option Modify topography to provide smoother fit
• from grid box to grid box

70
Downward Mass Flux (C Grid)
71
(No Transcript)
72
(No Transcript)
73
OTHER MODEL DEVELOPMENT AREAS

• Aerosols (S. Bauer, D. Koch)
• Dust, sulfate, black carbon, nitrate, sea salt
• Indirect Effects f( Cloud droplet number)
• Testing bin microphysics scheme
• Chemistry (D. Shindell)
• Oxidants (H2O2, O3) interactive with aerosol
  chemistry
• Heterogeneous Chemistry
• Need hydrocarbons (methane, terpines, isoprene)
  to be
• interactive with biospheric state
• Boundary Layer (V. Canuto, Y. Chen)
• Cloud conserved variables liquid water potential
  temperature, total water (Adrian Lock
  parameterizations)
• Sea ice (G. Schmidt, D. Rind, R. Bleck)
• Sensitivity too low
• Move to Ocean Grid

74
Comparison of Models

• Similarities
• numerical calculation of the dynamical equations
• atmospheric radiation
• atmospheric turbulence (calculated at all levels
  of the atmosphere using a second order closure
  scheme with non-local turbulence)
• the land surface (including vegetation)
• most of the input files (solar irradiance,
  aerosol and trace gas distribution, sea surface
  temperatures and sea ice, vegetation and soils)

75

• Differences
• Calculation of surface fluxes Model 3 uses
  virtual potential temp
• Clouds and convection different choices
  regarding
• downdraft entrainment (none is used in Model 3)
• the partitioning between convective precipitation
  and detrainment into anvil clouds (a fixed
  percentage, 50 is used in model 3, a three part
  formulation in model E)
• partitioning of subgrid convective and
  non-convective areas (which affects the choice of
  the cloud formation threshold relative humidity)
• cloud water evaporation (none is used in Model E)
• Net effect
• Cloud liquid water content some 70 higher in E23
  but cloud cover slightly higher in M23 so its
  albedo is slightly higher (30.9 compared with
  29.4)
• Net radiation over land higher in E23 (8Wm-2)
  Net radiation over ocean higher in M23 (5Wm-2)
  so global value is similar
• Both are improvements in M23, as E23 has
  excessive solar radiation over land especially in
  the Southern Hemisphere, and deficient radiation
  over the ocean, especially in the Northern
  Hemisphere (Schmidt et al. ,2006) - in both cases
  where the biggest differences with M23 are
  located.
• Gravity wave drag similar formulation in E23 to
  Model 3 but values in Model E are much larger
  E20 uses Rayleigh friction gravity waves help
  initiate high level cloud cover in Model 3
• Filter on the u,v winds only in x direction in
  Model E, in x,y directions in Model 3
• Vertical resolution altitudes below/above 100mb
• E2011/9 E23, M23 13/10 M53, F53 29/24
  F10258/44
• Model top all at 0.002mb except E20 (0.1mb)

76
Impact of Model Physics (e.g., M23 vs E23)

• E23 has slower interhemispheric transport,
  associated with reduced precipitation over land.
• The convection in E23 extends to somewhat higher
  levels over land in the tropics which affects
  tracer transport into the highest tropical
  troposphere levels
• Both differences lead to reduced EKE in upper
  tropical troposphere in Model E, and hence
  greater transport into the stratosphere (eddy
  energy produces heat divergence and subsidence)
• Gravity wave drag is much stronger in Model E,
  and this with the largest net transport between
  the troposphere and stratosphere. The large
  gravity wave drag is associated with the
  anomalous oscillating vertical transports in the
  upper troposphere/lower stratosphere near the
  N.H. subtropical jet in E23, and helps produce
  the more leaky tropical pipe in both Model E
  versions. It also provides for the (spurious)
  more downward ozone transport in the Southern
  Hemisphere than in the north, due to its large
  effects on eddy energy in the Northern Hemisphere
  lower stratosphere.
• Boundary layer physics in Model E seems to
  provide for good boundary layer height variations
  and surface concentrations despite reduced
  vertical resolution
• Top of the model in E20 helps produce increased
  upward transports to the upper stratosphere -
  result is more realistic, but method is spurious

77
Impact of Model Resolution

• Horizontal Resolution M53 and F53 have very
  similar transport characteristics similar
  interhemispheric transports, and similar
  percentage of eddy/MMC contribution to the ITH,
  similar EKE and intrahemispheric transport,
  generally similar vertical transport within the
  troposphere (somewhat more convective mass flux
  in M53, although the flux extends up to similar
  levels), very similar transport between the
  troposphere and stratosphere, with only slightly
  longer residence time for bomb 14C within the
  stratosphere. Within the stratosphere, the
  leakiness of the tropical pipe is similar, while
  the age of air is also quite similar except at
  higher northern latitudes, where it is older in
  M53. From this perspective, simply increasing the
  horizontal resolution does not have much impact
  on the tracer transports.
• Vertical resolution effects can be tested by
  comparison of M23 and M53, as well as F53 and
  F102. In contrast to the situation for horizontal
  resolution, vertical resolution makes a
  noticeable difference for these transports. The
  finer vertical resolution runs have faster
  interhemispheric transport (associated with both
  stronger Hadley circulation and increased
  tropical eddy energy), slower transport between
  the troposphere and stratosphere, older age of
  air, and a less leaky stratospheric tropical
  pipe. In many cases the differences are not
  large, but they occur both with and without the
  ozone-radiation interaction. M53 also has
  increased convective mass flux and thus puts more
  tracer in the upper troposphere than M23, but
  this is not true for F53 vs. F102.
• The combined increase in vertical and horizontal
  resolution in F102 does have effects that are not
  apparent when just horizontal resolution is
  increased in particular the tropical EKE is much
  larger, the moist convective transports dont
  reach to as high a level, and there are some
  differences in the boundary layer concentrations
  of Rn222. The basic idea that to maximize the
  ability for finer scale waves to be generated one
  needs increases in both horizontal and vertical
  resolutions seems to be borne out by these
  experiments and the effect on tracer transports.

78
(No Transcript)
79
(No Transcript)
80
(No Transcript)