scholarly journals Ocean-only FAFMIP: Understanding Regional Patterns of Ocean Heat Content and Dynamic Sea Level Change.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Todd ◽  
Laure Zanna ◽  
Matthew Couldrey ◽  
Jonathan M. Gregory ◽  
Quran Wu ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Alexander Todd ◽  
Laure Zanna ◽  
Matthew Couldrey ◽  
Jonathan Gregory ◽  
Quran Wu ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Todd ◽  
Laure Zanna ◽  
Jonathan Gregory

<p>A rise in global mean sea level is a robust feature of projected anthropogenic climate change using state-of-the-art atmosphere-ocean general circulation models (AOGCMs). However, there is considerable disagreement over the more policy-relevant regional patterns of sea level rise. The Flux-Anomaly-Forced Model Intercomparison Project (FAFMIP) aims to improve our understanding of the mechanisms controlling regional and dynamic sea level change. In FAFMIP, identical air-sea buoyancy and momentum flux perturbations are applied to an ensemble of different AOGCMs, to sample the uncertainty associated with model structure and physical processes. Our novel implementation applies FAFMIP perturbations to an ensemble of OGCMs. This framework enables an estimate of the unknown atmosphere-ocean feedbacks, by comparing the coupled and ocean-only response to surface flux perturbations.</p><p>Comparing the response to idealised FAFMIP forcing with more realistic, increasing CO2 forcing, much of the spread in regional sea level projections for the North Atlantic and Southern Ocean arises from ocean model structural differences. Ocean-only simulations indicate that only a small proportion of this spread is due to differences in the atmosphere-ocean feedback. Novel tendency diagnostics indicate the relative effect of resolved advection, parametrised eddies, and dianeutral mixing on regional and dynamic sea level change. This study helps to reduce uncertainty in regional sea level projections by refining our estimates of atmosphere-ocean feedbacks and developing our understanding of the physical processes controlling sea level change.</p>


2015 ◽  
Vol 120 (8) ◽  
pp. 5749-5765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleg A. Saenko ◽  
Duo Yang ◽  
Jonathan M. Gregory ◽  
Paul Spence ◽  
Paul G. Myers

Author(s):  
Shinya Kouketsu ◽  
Toshimasa Doi ◽  
Takeshi Kawano ◽  
Shuhei Masuda ◽  
Nozomi Sugiura ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 39 (10) ◽  
pp. n/a-n/a ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Levitus ◽  
J. I. Antonov ◽  
T. P. Boyer ◽  
O. K. Baranova ◽  
H. E. Garcia ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Howard ◽  
J. Ridley ◽  
A. K. Pardaens ◽  
R. T. W. L. Hurkmans ◽  
A. J. Payne ◽  
...  

Abstract. Climate change has the potential to locally influence mean sea level through a number of processes including (but not limited to) thermal expansion of the oceans and enhanced land ice melt. These lead to departures from the global mean sea level change, due to spatial variations in the change of water density and transport, which are termed dynamic sea level changes. In this study we present regional patterns of sea-level change projected by a global coupled atmosphere–ocean climate model forced by projected ice-melt fluxes from three sources: the Antarctic ice sheet, the Greenland ice sheet and small glaciers and ice caps. The largest ice melt flux we consider is equivalent to almost 0.7 m of global sea level rise over the 21st century. Since the ice melt is not constant, the evolution of the dynamic sea level changes is analysed. We find that the dynamic sea level change associated with the ice melt is small, with the largest changes, occurring in the North Atlantic, contributing of order 3 cm above the global mean rise. Furthermore, the dynamic sea level change associated with the ice melt is similar regardless of whether the simulated ice fluxes are applied to a simulation with fixed or changing atmospheric CO2.


2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 169-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. B. A. Slangen ◽  
R. S. W. van de Wal ◽  
Y. Wada ◽  
L. L. A. Vermeersen

Abstract. Although the global mean sea-level budget for the 20th century can now be closed, the understanding of sea-level change on a regional scale is still limited. In this study we compare observations from tide gauges to regional patterns from various contributions to sea-level change to see how much of the regional measurements can be explained. Processes that are included are land ice mass changes and terrestrial storage changes with associated gravitational, rotational and deformational effects, steric/dynamic changes, atmospheric pressure loading and Glacial Isostatic Adjustment (GIA). The study focuses on the mean linear trend between 1961 and 2003. It is found that on a regional level the explained variance of the observed trend is 0.87 with a regression coefficient of 1.08. The observations and models overlap within the 1σ uncertainty range in all regions. The leading processes in explaining the variability in the observations appear to be the steric/dynamic component and the GIA. Local observations prove to be more difficult to explain because they show larger spatial variations, and therefore require more information on small-scale processes.


2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 243-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. B. A. Slangen ◽  
R. S. W. van de Wal ◽  
Y. Wada ◽  
L. L. A. Vermeersen

Abstract. Although the global mean sea-level budget for the 20th century can now be closed, the understanding of sea-level change on a regional scale is still limited. In this study we compare observations from tide gauges to regional patterns from various contributions to sea-level change to see how much of the regional measurements can be explained. Processes that are included are land ice mass changes and terrestrial storage changes with associated gravitational, rotational and deformational effects, steric/dynamic changes, atmospheric pressure loading and glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA). The study focuses on the mean linear trend of regional sea-level rise between 1961 and 2003. It is found that on a regional level the explained variance of the observed trend is 0.87 with a regression coefficient of 1.07. The observations and models overlap within the 1σ uncertainty range in all regions. The main processes explaining the variability in the observations appear to be the steric/dynamic component and the GIA. Local observations prove to be more difficult to explain because they show larger spatial variations, and therefore require more information on small-scale processes.


2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (24) ◽  
pp. 5889-5911 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Wunsch ◽  
Rui M. Ponte ◽  
Patrick Heimbach

Abstract Estimates of regional patterns of global sea level change are obtained from a 1° horizontal resolution general circulation model constrained by least squares to about 100 million ocean observations and many more meteorological estimates during the period 1993–2004. The data include not only altimetric variability, but most of the modern hydrography, Argo float profiles, sea surface temperature, and other observations. Spatial-mean trends in altimetric data are explicitly suppressed to isolate global average long-term changes required by the in situ data alone. On large scales, some regions display strong signals although few individual points have statistically significant trends. In the regional patterns, thermal, salinity, and mass redistribution contributions are all important, showing that regional sea level change is tied directly to the general circulation. Contributions below about 900 m are significant, but not dominant, and are expected to grow with time as the abyssal ocean shifts. Estimates made here produce a global mean of about 1.6 mm yr−1, or about 60% of the pure altimetric estimate, of which about 70% is from the addition of freshwater. Interannual global variations may be dominated by the freshwater changes rather than by heating changes. The widely quoted altimetric global average values may well be correct, but the accuracies being inferred in the literature are not testable by existing in situ observations. Useful estimation of the global averages is extremely difficult given the realities of space–time sampling and model approximations. Systematic errors are likely to dominate most estimates of global average change: published values and error bars should be used very cautiously.


Boreas ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 201-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
MATS RUNDGREN ◽  
ÓLAFUR INGÓLFSSON ◽  
SVANTE BJÖRCK ◽  
HUI JIANG ◽  
HAFLIDI HAFLIDASON

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document