scholarly journals Compensation between Model Feedbacks and Curtailment of Climate Sensitivity

2010 ◽  
Vol 23 (11) ◽  
pp. 3009-3018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Huybers
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Circulation Model ◽  
Lapse Rate ◽  
Statistical Interpretation ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Ocean Heat Uptake ◽  
Feedback Strength

Abstract The spread in climate sensitivity obtained from 12 general circulation model runs used in the Fourth Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicates a 95% confidence interval of 2.1°–5.5°C, but this reflects compensation between model feedbacks. In particular, cloud feedback strength negatively covaries with the albedo feedback as well as with the combined water vapor plus lapse rate feedback. If the compensation between feedbacks is removed, the 95% confidence interval for climate sensitivity expands to 1.9°–8.0°C. Neither of the quoted 95% intervals adequately reflects the understanding of climate sensitivity, but their differences illustrate that model interdependencies must be understood before model spread can be correctly interpreted. The degree of negative covariance between feedbacks is unlikely to result from chance alone. It may, however, result from the method by which the feedbacks were estimated, physical relationships represented in the models, or from conditioning the models upon some combination of observations and expectations. This compensation between model feedbacks—when taken together with indications that variations in radiative forcing and the rate of ocean heat uptake play a similar compensatory role in models—suggests that conditioning of the models acts to curtail the intermodel spread in climate sensitivity. Observations used to condition the models ought to be explicitly stated, or there is the risk of doubly calling on data for purposes of both calibration and evaluation. Conditioning the models upon individual expectation (e.g., anchoring to the Charney range of 3° ± 1.5°C), to the extent that it exists, greatly complicates statistical interpretation of the intermodel spread.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Climate Feedback Strength between CO2 Doubling and LGM Experiments

2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (12) ◽  
pp. 3374-3395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masakazu Yoshimori ◽  
Tokuta Yokohata ◽  
Ayako Abe-Ouchi
Keyword(s):  
Water Vapor ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Lapse Rate ◽  
Climate Feedback ◽  
Water Vapor Feedback ◽  
Feedback Strength ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Difference

Abstract Studies of the climate in the past potentially provide a constraint on the uncertainty of climate sensitivity, but previous studies warn against a simple scaling to the future. Climate sensitivity is determined by a number of feedback processes, and they may vary according to climate states and forcings. In this study, the similarities and differences in feedbacks for CO2 doubling, a Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), and LGM greenhouse gas (GHG) forcing experiments are investigated using an atmospheric general circulation model coupled to a slab ocean model. After computing the radiative forcing, the individual feedback strengths of water vapor, lapse-rate, albedo, and cloud feedbacks are evaluated explicitly. For this particular model, the difference in the climate sensitivity between the experiments is attributed to the shortwave cloud feedback, in which there is a tendency for it to become weaker or even negative in cooling experiments. No significant difference is found in the water vapor feedback between warming and cooling experiments by GHGs. The weaker positive water vapor feedback in the LGM experiment resulting from a relatively weaker tropical forcing is compensated for by the stronger positive lapse-rate feedback resulting from a relatively stronger extratropical forcing. A hypothesis is proposed that explains the asymmetric cloud response between the warming and cooling experiments associated with a displacement of the region of mixed-phase clouds. The difference in the total feedback strength between the experiments is, however, relatively small compared to the current intermodel spread, and does not necessarily preclude the use of LGM climate as a future constraint.

scholarly journals How Well Do We Understand and Evaluate Climate Change Feedback Processes?

2006 ◽  
Vol 19 (15) ◽  
pp. 3445-3482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandrine Bony ◽  
Robert Colman ◽  
Vladimir M. Kattsov ◽  
Richard P. Allan ◽  
Christopher S. Bretherton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
External Perturbation ◽  
General Circulation Models ◽  
Lapse Rate ◽  
Climate Feedback ◽  
Climate Feedbacks ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Global Estimates

Abstract Processes in the climate system that can either amplify or dampen the climate response to an external perturbation are referred to as climate feedbacks. Climate sensitivity estimates depend critically on radiative feedbacks associated with water vapor, lapse rate, clouds, snow, and sea ice, and global estimates of these feedbacks differ among general circulation models. By reviewing recent observational, numerical, and theoretical studies, this paper shows that there has been progress since the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in (i) the understanding of the physical mechanisms involved in these feedbacks, (ii) the interpretation of intermodel differences in global estimates of these feedbacks, and (iii) the development of methodologies of evaluation of these feedbacks (or of some components) using observations. This suggests that continuing developments in climate feedback research will progressively help make it possible to constrain the GCMs’ range of climate feedbacks and climate sensitivity through an ensemble of diagnostics based on physical understanding and observations.

scholarly journals Separation of Contributions from Radiative Feedbacks to Polar Amplification on an Aquaplanet

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 3010-3024 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter L. Langen ◽  
Rune Grand Graversen ◽  
Thorsten Mauritsen
Keyword(s):  
Water Vapor ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Surface Albedo ◽  
Circulation Model ◽  
Lapse Rate ◽  
Low Latitude ◽  
Polar Amplification ◽  
Water Vapor Feedback ◽  
The Difference

Abstract When climate is forced by a doubling of CO2, a number of feedback processes are induced, such as changes of water vapor, clouds, and surface albedo. Here the CO2 forcing and concomitant feedbacks are studied individually using a general circulation model coupled to an aquaplanet mixed layer ocean. A technique for fixing the radiative effects of moisture and clouds by reusing these variables from 1 × CO2 and 2 × CO2 equilibrium climates in the model’s radiation code allows for a detailed decomposition of forcings, feedbacks, and responses. The cloud feedback in this model is found to have a weak global average effect and surface albedo feedbacks have been eliminated. As in previous studies, the water vapor feedback is found to approximately double climate sensitivity, but while its radiative effect is strongly amplified at low latitudes, the resulting response displays about the same degree of polar amplification as the full all-feedbacks experiment. In fact, atmospheric energy transports are found to change in a way that yields the same meridional pattern of response as when the water vapor feedback is turned off. The authors conclude that while the water vapor feedback does not in itself lead to polar amplification by increasing the ratio of high- to low-latitude warming, it does double climate sensitivity both at low and high latitudes. A polar amplification induced by other feedbacks in the system, such as the Planck and lapse rate feedbacks here, is thus strengthened in the sense of increasing the difference in high- and low-latitude warming.

scholarly journals Sensitivity of Global Warming to Carbon Emissions: Effects of Heat and Carbon Uptake in a Suite of Earth System Models

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (23) ◽  
pp. 9343-9363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard G. Williams ◽  
Vassil Roussenov ◽  
Philip Goodwin ◽  
Laure Resplandy ◽  
Laurent Bopp
Keyword(s):  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Carbon Emissions ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
Carbon Uptake ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Ocean Heat Uptake ◽  
Surface Warming ◽  
System Models ◽  
Heat Uptake ◽  
Earth System Models

Climate projections reveal global-mean surface warming increasing nearly linearly with cumulative carbon emissions. The sensitivity of surface warming to carbon emissions is interpreted in terms of a product of three terms: the dependence of surface warming on radiative forcing, the fractional radiative forcing from CO2, and the dependence of radiative forcing from CO2 on carbon emissions. Mechanistically each term varies, respectively, with climate sensitivity and ocean heat uptake, radiative forcing contributions, and ocean and terrestrial carbon uptake. The sensitivity of surface warming to fossil-fuel carbon emissions is examined using an ensemble of Earth system models, forced either by an annual increase in atmospheric CO2 or by RCPs until year 2100. The sensitivity of surface warming to carbon emissions is controlled by a temporal decrease in the dependence of radiative forcing from CO2 on carbon emissions, which is partly offset by a temporal increase in the dependence of surface warming on radiative forcing. The decrease in the dependence of radiative forcing from CO2 is due to a decline in the ratio of the global ocean carbon undersaturation to carbon emissions, while the increase in the dependence of surface warming is due to a decline in the ratio of ocean heat uptake to radiative forcing. At the present time, there are large intermodel differences in the sensitivity in surface warming to carbon emissions, which are mainly due to uncertainties in the climate sensitivity and ocean heat uptake. These uncertainties undermine the ability to predict how much carbon may be emitted before reaching a warming target.

scholarly journals A new radiation infrastructure for the Modular Earth Submodel System (MESSy, based on version 2.51)

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone Dietmüller ◽  
Patrick Jöckel ◽  
Holger Tost ◽  
Markus Kunze ◽  
Cathrin Gellhorn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Optical Properties ◽  
Atmospheric Chemistry ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Circulation Model ◽  
Shortwave Radiation ◽  
Aerosol Optical Properties ◽  
On Line ◽  
User Friendly ◽  
Radiation Scheme

Abstract. The Modular Earth Submodel System (MESSy) provides an interface to couple submodels to a basemodel via a highly flexible data management facility (Jöckel et al., 2010). In the present paper we present the four new radiation related submodels RAD, AEROPT, CLOUDOPT and ORBIT. The submodel RAD (with shortwave radiation scheme RAD_FUBRAD) simulates the radiative transfer, the submodel AEROPT calculates the aerosol optical properties, the submodel CLOUDOPT calculates the cloud optical properties, and the submodel ORBIT is responsible for Earth orbit calculations. These submodels are coupled via the standard MESSy infrastructure and are largely based on the original radiation scheme of the general circulation model ECHAM5, however, expanded with additional features. These features comprise, among others, user-friendly and flexibly controllable (by namelists) on-line radiative forcing calculations by multiple diagnostic calls of the radiation routines. With this, it is now possible to calculate radiative forcing (instantaneous as well as stratosphere adjusted) of various greenhouse gases simultaneously in only one simulation, as well as the radiative forcing of cloud perturbations. Examples of on-line radiative forcing calculations in the ECHAM/MESSy Atmospheric Chemistry (EMAC) model are presented.

scholarly journals Climatic effects of 1950–2050 changes in US anthropogenic aerosols – Part 1: Aerosol trends and radiative forcing

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 24085-24125 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. M. Leibensperger ◽  
L. J. Mickley ◽  
D. J. Jacob ◽  
W.-T. Chen ◽  
J. H. Seinfeld ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Transport Model ◽  
Circulation Model ◽  
Anthropogenic Sources ◽  
So2 Emissions ◽  
Anthropogenic Aerosols ◽  
Climatic Effects ◽  
Anthropogenic Aerosol ◽  
Direct Forcing

Abstract. We use the GEOS-Chem chemical transport model combined with the GISS general circulation model to calculate the aerosol direct and indirect (warm cloud) radiative forcings from US anthropogenic sources over the 1950–2050 period, based on historical emission inventories and future projections from the IPCC A1B scenario. The aerosol simulation is evaluated with observed spatial distributions and 1980–2010 trends of aerosol concentrations and wet deposition in the contiguous US. The radiative forcing from US anthropogenic aerosols is strongly localized over the eastern US. We find that it peaked in 1970–1990, with values over the eastern US (east of 100° W) of −2.0 W m−2 for direct forcing including contributions from sulfate (−2.0 W m−2), nitrate (−0.2 W m−2), organic carbon (−0.2 W m−2), and black carbon (+0.4 W m−2). The aerosol indirect effect is of comparable magnitude to the direct forcing. We find that the forcing declined sharply from 1990 to 2010 (by 0.8 W m−2 direct and 1.0 W m−2 indirect), mainly reflecting decreases in SO2 emissions, and project that it will continue declining post-2010 but at a much slower rate since US SO2 emissions have already declined by almost 60 % from their peak. This suggests that much of the warming effect of reducing US anthropogenic aerosol sources may have already been realized by 2010, however some additional warming is expected through 2020. The small positive radiative forcing from US BC emissions (+0.3 W m−2 over the eastern US in 2010) suggests that an emission control strategy focused on BC would have only limited climate benefit.

Modelling high-latitude explosive eruptions and their atmospheric and environmental impacts

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herman Fuglestvedt ◽  
Zhihong Zhuo ◽  
Michael Sigl ◽  
Matthew Toohey ◽  
Michael Mills ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
High Latitude ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Lower Thermosphere ◽  
Circulation Model ◽  
Ice Cores ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Explosive Eruptions ◽  
Sulphate Deposition

<p>Large explosive volcanic eruptions inject sulphur into the stratosphere where it is converted to sulphur dioxide and sulphate aerosols. Due to atmospheric circulation patterns, aerosols from high-latitude eruptions typically remain concentrated in the hemisphere in which they are injected. Eruptions in the high-latitude Northern Hemisphere could thus lead to a stronger hemispheric radiative forcing and surface climate response than tropical eruptions, a claim that is supported by a previous study based on proxy records and the coupled aerosol-general circulation model MAECHAM5-HAM. Additionally, the subsequent surface deposition of volcanic sulphate is potentially harmful to humans and ecosystems, and an improved understanding of the deposition over polar ice sheets can contribute to better reconstructions of historical volcanic forcing. On this basis, we model Icelandic explosive eruptions in a pre-industrial atmosphere, taking both volcanic sulphur and halogen loading into account. We use the fully coupled Earth system model CESM2 with the atmospheric component WACCM6, which extends to the lower thermosphere and has prognostic stratospheric aerosols and full chemistry. In order to study the volcanic impacts on the atmosphere, environment, and sulphate deposition, we vary eruption parameters such as sulphur and halogen loading, and injection altitude and season. The modelled volcanic sulphate deposition is compared to the deposition in ice cores following comparable historical eruptions. Furthermore, we evaluate the potential environmental impacts of sulphate deposition. To study inter-model differences, we also compare the CESM2-WACCM6 simulations to similar Icelandic eruption experiments simulated with MAECHAM5-HAM. </p>

scholarly journals Interannual Variations of Summer Monsoons: Sensitivity to Cloud Radiative Forcing

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 1883-1905 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. P. Sharma ◽  
H. Le Treut ◽  
G. Sèze ◽  
L. Fairhead ◽  
R. Sadourny
Keyword(s):  
Optical Properties ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Initial Conditions ◽  
Model Simulation ◽  
Circulation Model ◽  
Interannual Variations ◽  
Radiative Effects ◽  
High Concentration ◽  
Sea Temperature

Abstract The sensitivity of the interannual variations of the summer monsoons to imposed cloudiness has been studied with a general circulation model using the initial conditions prepared from the European Centre for Medium-Range Forecasts analyses of 1 May 1987 and 1988. The cloud optical properties in this global model are calculated from prognostically computed cloud liquid water. The model successfully simulates the contrasting behavior of these two successive monsoons. However, when the optical properties of the observed clouds are specified in the model runs, the simulations show some degradation over India and its vicinity. The main cause of this degradation is the reduced land–sea temperature contrast resulting from the radiative effects of the observed clouds imposed in such simulations. It is argued that the high concentration of condensed water content of clouds over the Indian land areas will serve to limit heating of the land, thereby reducing the thermal contrast that gives rise to a weak Somali jet. A countermonsoon circulation is, therefore, simulated in the vector difference field of 850-hPa winds from the model runs with externally specified clouds. This countermonsoon circulation is associated with an equatorial heat source that is the response of the model to the radiative effects of the imposed clouds. Indeed, there are at least two clear points that can be made: 1) the cloud–SST patterns, together, affect the interannual variability; and 2) with both clouds and SST imposed, the model simulation is less sensitive to initial conditions. Additionally, the study emphasizes the importance of dynamically consistent clouds developing in response to the dynamical, thermal, and moist state of the atmosphere during model integrations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document