scholarly journals CMIP5 models' shortwave cloud radiative response and climate sensitivity linked to the climatological Hadley cell extent

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (11) ◽  
pp. 5739-5748 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard R. Lipat ◽  
George Tselioudis ◽  
Kevin M. Grise ◽  
Lorenzo M. Polvani
Keyword(s):  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Hadley Cell ◽  
Cmip5 Models

Effective forcing in CMIP5 assuming nonconstant feedback parameter and linear response

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hege-Beate Fredriksen
Keyword(s):  
Time Scales ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Temperature Response ◽  
Previous Method ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Nonlinear Feedback ◽  
Geophysical Research ◽  
Linear Temperature ◽  
Feedback Parameter

<p>We investigate a new algorithm for estimating time-evolving global forcing in climate models. The method is an extension of a previous method by Forster et al. (2013), but here we also allow for a globally nonlinear feedback. We assume the nonlinearity of this global feedback can be explained as a time-scale dependence, associated with linear temperature responses to the forcing on different time scales, as in Proistosescu and Huybers (2017). With this method we obtain stronger forcing estimates than previously believed for the representative concentration pathway experiments in CMIP5 models. The reason for the higher future forcing is that the global feedback has a higher magnitude at the smaller time scales than at the longer time scales – this is closely related to provided arguments for the equilibrium climate sensitivity showing changes with time.</p><p>We find also that the linear temperature response to our new forcing predicts the modelled response quite well, although the response is a little overestimated for some CMIP5 models. Finally, we discuss the assumptions made in our study, and consistency of our assumptions with other leading hypotheses for why the global feedback is nonlinear.</p><p> </p><p>References:</p><p>Forster, P. M., T. Andrews, P. Good, J. M. Gregory, L. S. Jackson, and M. Zelinka (2013), Evaluating adjusted forcing and model spread for historical and future scenarios in the cmip5 generation of climate models, Journal of Geophysical Research, 118, 1139–1150, doi:10.1002/jgrd.50174.</p><p>Proistosescu, C., and P. J. Huybers (2017), Slow climate mode reconciles historical and model-based estimates of climate sensitivity, Sci. Adv., 3, e1602, 821, doi:10.1126/sciadv.1602821</p>

Reexamining the Relationship between Climate Sensitivity and the Southern Hemisphere Radiation Budget in CMIP Models

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (23) ◽  
pp. 9298-9312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin M. Grise ◽  
Lorenzo M. Polvani ◽  
John T. Fasullo
Keyword(s):  
Southern Ocean ◽  
Southern Hemisphere ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Radiation Budget ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Net Radiation ◽  
Subtropical Clouds

Abstract Recent efforts to narrow the spread in equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) across global climate models have focused on identifying observationally based constraints, which are rooted in empirical correlations between ECS and biases in the models’ present-day climate. This study reexamines one such constraint identified from CMIP3 models: the linkage between ECS and net top-of-the-atmosphere radiation biases in the Southern Hemisphere (SH). As previously documented, the intermodel spread in the ECS of CMIP3 models is linked to present-day cloud and net radiation biases over the midlatitude Southern Ocean, where higher cloud fraction in the present-day climate is associated with larger values of ECS. However, in this study, no physical explanation is found to support this relationship. Furthermore, it is shown here that this relationship disappears in CMIP5 models and is unique to a subset of CMIP models characterized by unrealistically bright present-day clouds in the SH subtropics. In view of this evidence, Southern Ocean cloud and net radiation biases appear inappropriate for providing observationally based constraints on ECS. Instead of the Southern Ocean, this study points to the stratocumulus-to-cumulus transition regions of the SH subtropical oceans as key to explaining the intermodel spread in the ECS of both CMIP3 and CMIP5 models. In these regions, ECS is linked to present-day cloud and net radiation biases with a plausible physical mechanism: models with brighter subtropical clouds in the present-day climate show greater ECS because 1) subtropical clouds dissipate with increasing CO2 concentrations in many models and 2) the dissipation of brighter clouds contributes to greater solar warming of the surface.

scholarly journals On the Climate Sensitivity and Historical Warming Evolution in Recent Coupled Model Ensembles

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Marie Flynn ◽  
Thorsten Mauritsen
Keyword(s):  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Antarctic Sea Ice ◽  
Intercomparison Project ◽  
Future Warming ◽  
Model Treatment ◽  
Systematic Shift ◽  
Model Ensembles

Abstract. The Earth's equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) to a doubling of atmospheric CO2, along with the transient 35 climate response (TCR) and greenhouse gas emissions pathways, determines the amount of future warming. Coupled climate models have in the past been important tools to estimate and understand ECS. ECS estimated from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) models lies between 2.0 and 4.7 K (mean of 3.2 K), whereas in the latest CMIP6 the spread has increased: 1.8–5.5 K (mean of 3.7 K), with 5 out of 25 models exceeding 5 K. It is thus pertinent to understand the causes underlying this shift. Here we compare the CMIP5 and CMIP6 model ensembles, and find a systematic shift between CMIP eras to be unexplained as a process of random sampling from modeled forcing and feedback distributions. Instead, shortwave feedbacks shift towards more positive values, in particular over the Southern Ocean, driving the shift towards larger ECS values in many of the models. These results suggest that changes in model treatment of mixed-phase cloud processes and changes to Antarctic sea ice representation are likely causes of the shift towards larger ECS. Somewhat surprisingly, CMIP6 models exhibit less historical warming than CMIP5 models; the evolution of the warming suggests, however, that several of the models apply too strong aerosol cooling resulting in too weak mid 20th Century warming compared to the instrumental record.

scholarly journals Hadley cell expansion in CMIP6 models

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin M. Grise ◽  
Sean M. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Greenhouse Gases ◽  
Cell Expansion ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Hadley Circulation ◽  
Global Climate Models ◽  
Hadley Cell ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Cell Edge ◽  
Poleward Shift

Abstract. In response to increasing greenhouse gases, the subtropical edges of Earth's Hadley circulation shift poleward in global climate models. Recent studies have found that reanalysis trends in the Hadley cell edge over the past 30–40 years are within the range of trends simulated by Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) models, and have documented seasonal and hemispheric asymmetries in these trends. In this study, we evaluate whether these conclusions hold for the newest generation of models (CMIP6). Overall, we find similar characteristics of Hadley cell expansion in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models. In both CMIP5 and CMIP6 models, the poleward shift of the Hadley cell edge in response to increasing greenhouse gases is 2–3 times larger in the Southern Hemisphere (SH), except during September–November. The trends from CMIP5 and CMIP6 models agree well with reanalyses, although prescribing observed coupled atmosphere-ocean variability allows the models to better capture reanalysis trends in the Northern Hemisphere (NH). We find two notable differences between CMIP5 and CMIP6 models. First, both CMIP5 and CMIP6 models contract the NH summertime Hadley circulation equatorward (particularly over the Pacific sector), but this contraction is larger in CMIP6 models due to their higher average climate sensitivity. Second, in recent decades, the poleward shift of the NH annual-mean Hadley cell edge is slightly larger in CMIP6 models. Increasing greenhouse gases drive similar trends in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models, so the larger recent NH trends in CMIP6 models point to the role of other forcings, such as aerosols.

scholarly journals Emergent constraints on transient climate response (TCR) and equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) from historical warming in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 737-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Femke J. M. M. Nijsse ◽  
Peter M. Cox ◽  
Mark S. Williamson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Response ◽  
Transient Climate Response ◽  
Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Emergent Constraint ◽  
Constraint Approach

Abstract. Climate sensitivity to CO2 remains the key uncertainty in projections of future climate change. Transient climate response (TCR) is the metric of temperature sensitivity that is most relevant to warming in the next few decades and contributes the biggest uncertainty to estimates of the carbon budgets consistent with the Paris targets. Equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) is vital for understanding longer-term climate change and stabilisation targets. In the IPCC 5th Assessment Report (AR5), the stated “likely” ranges (16 %–84 % confidence) of TCR (1.0–2.5 K) and ECS (1.5–4.5 K) were broadly consistent with the ensemble of CMIP5 Earth system models (ESMs) available at the time. However, many of the latest CMIP6 ESMs have larger climate sensitivities, with 5 of 34 models having TCR values above 2.5 K and an ensemble mean TCR of 2.0±0.4 K. Even starker, 12 of 34 models have an ECS value above 4.5 K. On the face of it, these latest ESM results suggest that the IPCC likely ranges may need revising upwards, which would cast further doubt on the feasibility of the Paris targets. Here we show that rather than increasing the uncertainty in climate sensitivity, the CMIP6 models help to constrain the likely range of TCR to 1.3–2.1 K, with a central estimate of 1.68 K. We reach this conclusion through an emergent constraint approach which relates the value of TCR linearly to the global warming from 1975 onwards. This is a period when the signal-to-noise ratio of the net radiative forcing increases strongly, so that uncertainties in aerosol forcing become progressively less problematic. We find a consistent emergent constraint on TCR when we apply the same method to CMIP5 models. Our constraints on TCR are in good agreement with other recent studies which analysed CMIP ensembles. The relationship between ECS and the post-1975 warming trend is less direct and also non-linear. However, we are able to derive a likely range of ECS of 1.9–3.4 K from the CMIP6 models by assuming an underlying emergent relationship based on a two-box energy balance model. Despite some methodological differences; this is consistent with a previously published ECS constraint derived from warming trends in CMIP5 models to 2005. Our results seem to be part of a growing consensus amongst studies that have applied the emergent constraint approach to different model ensembles and to different aspects of the record of global warming.

scholarly journals Effective radiative forcing and adjustments in CMIP6 models

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (16) ◽  
pp. 9591-9618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Smith ◽  
Ryan J. Kramer ◽  
Gunnar Myhre ◽  
Kari Alterskjær ◽  
William Collins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Internal Variability ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Model Intercomparison ◽  
Aerosol Forcing ◽  
Intercomparison Project ◽  
Effective Radiative Forcing

Abstract. The effective radiative forcing, which includes the instantaneous forcing plus adjustments from the atmosphere and surface, has emerged as the key metric of evaluating human and natural influence on the climate. We evaluate effective radiative forcing and adjustments in 17 contemporary climate models that are participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) and have contributed to the Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (RFMIP). Present-day (2014) global-mean anthropogenic forcing relative to pre-industrial (1850) levels from climate models stands at 2.00 (±0.23) W m−2, comprised of 1.81 (±0.09) W m−2 from CO2, 1.08 (± 0.21) W m−2 from other well-mixed greenhouse gases, −1.01 (± 0.23) W m−2 from aerosols and −0.09 (±0.13) W m−2 from land use change. Quoted uncertainties are 1 standard deviation across model best estimates, and 90 % confidence in the reported forcings, due to internal variability, is typically within 0.1 W m−2. The majority of the remaining 0.21 W m−2 is likely to be from ozone. In most cases, the largest contributors to the spread in effective radiative forcing (ERF) is from the instantaneous radiative forcing (IRF) and from cloud responses, particularly aerosol–cloud interactions to aerosol forcing. As determined in previous studies, cancellation of tropospheric and surface adjustments means that the stratospherically adjusted radiative forcing is approximately equal to ERF for greenhouse gas forcing but not for aerosols, and consequentially, not for the anthropogenic total. The spread of aerosol forcing ranges from −0.63 to −1.37 W m−2, exhibiting a less negative mean and narrower range compared to 10 CMIP5 models. The spread in 4×CO2 forcing has also narrowed in CMIP6 compared to 13 CMIP5 models. Aerosol forcing is uncorrelated with climate sensitivity. Therefore, there is no evidence to suggest that the increasing spread in climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models, particularly related to high-sensitivity models, is a consequence of a stronger negative present-day aerosol forcing and little evidence that modelling groups are systematically tuning climate sensitivity or aerosol forcing to recreate observed historical warming.

scholarly journals Climate Sensitivity and Feedbacks of a New Coupled Model CAMS-CSM to Idealized CO2 Forcing: A Comparison with CMIP5 Models

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaolong Chen ◽  
Zhun Guo ◽  
Tianjun Zhou ◽  
Jian Li ◽  
Xinyao Rong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Co2 Forcing

Quantifying the Summertime Response of the Austral Jet Stream and Hadley Cell to Stratospheric Ozone and Greenhouse Gases

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (14) ◽  
pp. 5538-5559 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin P. Gerber ◽  
Seok-Woo Son
Keyword(s):  
Greenhouse Gases ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Hadley Cell ◽  
Dynamical Response ◽  
Jet Stream ◽  
Temperature Trends ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The impact of anthropogenic forcing on the summertime austral circulation is assessed across three climate model datasets: the Chemistry–Climate Model Validation activity 2 and phases 3 and 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. Changes in stratospheric ozone and greenhouse gases impact the Southern Hemisphere in this season, and a simple framework based on temperature trends in the lower polar stratosphere and upper tropical troposphere is developed to separate their effects. It suggests that shifts in the jet stream and Hadley cell are driven by changes in the upper-troposphere–lower-stratosphere temperature gradient. The mean response is comparable in the three datasets; ozone has chiefly caused the poleward shift observed in recent decades, while ozone and greenhouse gases largely offset each other in the future. The multimodel mean perspective, however, masks considerable spread in individual models’ circulation projections. Spread resulting from differences in temperature trends is separated from differences in the circulation response to a given temperature change; both contribute equally to uncertainty in future circulation trends. Spread in temperature trends is most associated with differences in polar stratospheric temperatures, and could be narrowed by reducing uncertainty in future ozone changes. Differences in tropical temperatures are also important, and arise from both uncertainty in future emissions and differences in models’ climate sensitivity. Differences in climate sensitivity, however, only matter significantly in a high emissions future. Even if temperature trends were known, however, differences in the dynamical response to temperature changes must be addressed to substantially narrow spread in circulation projections.

scholarly journals Tropical and subtropical forcing of future southern hemisphere stationary wave changes

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-48
Author(s):  
Matthew Patterson ◽  
Tim Woollings ◽  
Thomas J. Bracegirdle
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Southern Hemisphere ◽  
Rossby Wave ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Stationary Wave ◽  
Hadley Cell ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Wave Source ◽  
Barotropic Model ◽  
Rossby Wave Source

AbstractStationary wave changes play a significant role in the regional climate change response in Southern Hemisphere (SH) winter. In particular, almost all CMIP5 models feature a substantial strengthening of the westerlies to the south of Australia and enhancement of the subtropical jet over the eastern Pacific in winter. In this study we investigate the mechanisms behind these changes, finding that the stationary wave response can largely be explained via reductions in the magnitude of the upper level Rossby wave source over the tropical / subtropical East Pacific. The Rossby wave source changes in this region are robust across the model ensemble and are strongly correlated with changes to low latitude circulation patterns, in particular, the projected southward migration of the Hadley cell and weakening of the Walker circulation. To confirm our mechanism of future changes, we employ a series of barotropic model experiments in which the barotropic model is given a background state identical to a particular CMIP5 model and an anomalous Rossby wave source is imposed. This simple approach is able to capture the primary features of the ensemble mean change, including the cyclonic anomaly south of Australia, and is also able to capture many of the inter-model differences. These findings will help to advance our understanding of the mechanisms underpinning SH extratropical circulation changes under climate change.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document