scholarly journals An inter-comparison of the mass budget of the Arctic sea ice in CMIP6 models

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Keen ◽  
Ed Blockley ◽  
David Bailey ◽  
Jens Boldingh Debernard ◽  
Mitchell Bushuk ◽  
...  

Abstract. We compare the mass budget of the Arctic sea ice for 14 models submitted to the latest Climate Model Inter-comparison Project (CMIP6), using new diagnostics that have not been available for previous model inter-comparisons. Using these diagnostics allows us to look beyond the standard metrics of ice cover and thickness, to compare the processes of sea ice growth and loss in climate models in a more detailed way than has previously been possible. For the 1960–89 multi-model mean, the dominant processes causing annual ice growth are basal growth and frazil ice formation, which both occur during the winter. The main processes by which ice is lost are basal melting, top melting and advection of ice out of the Arctic. The first two processes occur in summer, while the latter process is present all year. The sea-ice budgets for individual models are strikingly similar overall in terms of the major processes causing ice growth and loss, and in terms of the time of year during which each process is important. However, there are also some key differences between the models. The relative amounts of frazil and basal ice formation varies between the models. This is, to some extent at least, attributable to exactly how the frazil growth is formulated within each model. There are also differences in the relative amounts of top and basal melting. As the ice cover and mass decline during the 21st century, we see a shift in the timing of the top and basal melting in the multi-model mean, with more melt occurring earlier in the year, and less melt later in the summer. The amount of basal growth in the autumn reduces, but the amount of basal growth later in the winter increases due to the ice being thinner. Overall, extra ice loss in May–June and reduced ice growth in October-November is partially offset by reduced ice melt in August and increased ice growth in January–February. For the individual models, changes in the budget components vary considerably in terms of magnitude and timing of change. However, when the evolving budget terms are considered as a function of the changing ice state itself, behaviours common to all the models emerge, suggesting that the sea ice components of the models are fundamentally responding in a broadly consistent way to the warming climate. Additional results from a forced ocean-ice model show that although atmospheric forcing is crucial for the sea ice mass budget, the sea ice physics also plays an important role.

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 951-982
Author(s):  
Ann Keen ◽  
Ed Blockley ◽  
David A. Bailey ◽  
Jens Boldingh Debernard ◽  
Mitchell Bushuk ◽  
...  

Abstract. We compare the mass budget of the Arctic sea ice for 15 models submitted to the latest Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), using new diagnostics that have not been available for previous model inter-comparisons. These diagnostics allow us to look beyond the standard metrics of ice cover and thickness to compare the processes of sea ice growth and loss in climate models in a more detailed way than has previously been possible. For the 1960–1989 multi-model mean, the dominant processes causing annual ice growth are basal growth and frazil ice formation, which both occur during the winter. The main processes by which ice is lost are basal melting, top melting and advection of ice out of the Arctic. The first two processes occur in summer, while the latter process is present all year. The sea ice budgets for individual models are strikingly similar overall in terms of the major processes causing ice growth and loss and in terms of the time of year during which each process is important. However, there are also some key differences between the models, and we have found a number of relationships between model formulation and components of the ice budget that hold for all or most of the CMIP6 models considered here. The relative amounts of frazil and basal ice formation vary between the models, and the amount of frazil ice formation is strongly dependent on the value chosen for the minimum frazil ice thickness. There are also differences in the relative amounts of top and basal melting, potentially dependent on how much shortwave radiation can penetrate through the sea ice into the ocean. For models with prognostic melt ponds, the choice of scheme may affect the amount of basal growth, basal melt and top melt, and the choice of thermodynamic scheme is important in determining the amount of basal growth and top melt. As the ice cover and mass decline during the 21st century, we see a shift in the timing of the top and basal melting in the multi-model mean, with more melt occurring earlier in the year and less melt later in the summer. The amount of basal growth reduces in the autumn, but it increases in the winter due to thinner sea ice over the course of the 21st century. Overall, extra ice loss in May–June and reduced ice growth in October–November are partially offset by reduced ice melt in August and increased ice growth in January–February. For the individual models, changes in the budget components vary considerably in terms of magnitude and timing of change. However, when the evolving budget terms are considered as a function of the changing ice state itself, behaviours common to all the models emerge, suggesting that the sea ice components of the models are fundamentally responding in a broadly consistent way to the warming climate. It is possible that this similarity in the model budgets may represent a lack of diversity in the model physics of the CMIP6 models considered here. The development of new observational datasets for validating the budget terms would help to clarify this.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 2855-2868 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Keen ◽  
Ed Blockley

Abstract. We present a method for analysing changes in the modelled volume budget of the Arctic sea ice as the ice declines during the 21st century. We apply the method to the CMIP5 global coupled model HadGEM2-ES to evaluate how the budget components evolve under a range of different forcing scenarios. As the climate warms and the ice cover declines, the sea ice processes that change the most in HadGEM2-ES are summer melting at the top surface of the ice due to increased net downward radiation and basal melting due to extra heat from the warming ocean. There is also extra basal ice formation due to the thinning ice. However, the impact of these changes on the volume budget is affected by the declining ice cover. For example, as the autumn ice cover declines the volume of ice formed by basal growth declines as there is a reduced area over which this ice growth can occur. As a result, the biggest contribution to Arctic ice decline in HadGEM2-ES is the reduction in the total amount of basal ice growth during the autumn and early winter. Changes in the volume budget during the 21st century have a distinctive seasonal cycle, with processes contributing to ice decline occurring in May–June and September to November. During July and August the total amount of sea ice melt decreases, again due to the reducing ice cover. The choice of forcing scenario affects the rate of ice decline and the timing and magnitude of changes in the volume budget components. For the HadGEM2-ES model and for the range of scenarios considered for CMIP5, the mean changes in the volume budget depend strongly on the evolving ice area and are independent of the speed at which the ice cover declines.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julienne Stroeve ◽  
Martin Vancoppenolle ◽  
Gaelle Veyssiere ◽  
Marion Lebrun ◽  
Giulia Castellani ◽  
...  

Arctic sea ice is shifting from a year-round to a seasonal sea ice cover. This substantial transformation, via a reduction in Arctic sea ice extent and a thinning of its thickness, influences the amount of light entering the upper ocean. This in turn impacts under-ice algal growth and associated ecosystem dynamics. Field campaigns have provided valuable insights as to how snow and ice properties impact light penetration at fixed locations in the Arctic, but to understand the spatial variability in the under-ice light field there is a need to scale up to the pan-Arctic level. Combining information from satellites with state-of-the-art parameterizations is one means to achieve this. This study combines satellite and modeled data products to map under-ice light on a monthly time-scale from 2011 through 2018. Key limitations pertain to the availability of satellite-derived sea ice thickness, which for radar altimetry, is only available during the sea ice growth season. We clearly show that year-to-year variability in snow depth, along with the fraction of thin ice, plays a key role in how much light enters the Arctic Ocean. This is particularly significant in April, which in some regions, coincides with the beginning of the under-ice algal bloom, whereas we find that ice thickness is the main driver of under-ice light availability at the end of the melt season in October. The extension to the melt season due to a warmer Arctic means that snow accumulation has reduced, which is leading to positive trends in light transmission through snow. This, combined with a thinner ice cover, should lead to increased under-ice PAR also in the summer months.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Keen ◽  
Ed Blockley

Abstract. We consider the volume budget of the Arctic sea ice in the CMIP5 global coupled model HadGEM2-ES, and evaluate how the budget components evolve during the 21st century under a range of different forcing scenarios. As the climate warms and the ice cover declines, the Arctic sea ice processes that change the most in HadGEM2-ES are summer melting at the top surface of the ice, and basal melting due to extra heat from the warming ocean. However, the declining ice cover affects how much impact these changes have on the ice volume budget, where the biggest contribution to Arctic ice decline is the reduction in the total amount of basal ice formation during the autumn and early winter. This highlights the importance of taking the declining ice area into account when evaluating projected changes in the sea ice budget, especially if comparing models with very different rates of decline. Changes in the volume budget during the 21st century have a distinctive seasonal cycle, with processes contributing to ice decline occurring in May/June and September to November. During July and August the total amount of sea ice melt decreases, due to the reducing ice cover. The choice of forcing scenario affects the rate of ice decline and the timing and magnitude of changes in the volume budget components, but for the HadGEM2-ES model and for the range of scenarios considered for CMIP5, the mean changes in the volume budget depend on the evolving ice area, and are independent of the speed at which the ice cover declines.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Cornish ◽  
Helen Johnson ◽  
Alice Richards ◽  
Yavor Kostov ◽  
Jakob Dörr

<p>Over the past few decades, Arctic sea ice volume has been decreasing faster in summer than winter; winter sea ice growth has been increasing, helping to restore the ice pack, despite the fact that Arctic warming is most intense in the winter. This raises the questions: why? And for how long can we expect winter ice growth to keep increasing? We pose these questions with a regional focus on the Kara and Laptev seas. These seas are often termed the ice factories of the Arctic because of their outsized contributions to the Arctic sea ice budget, a consequence of their divergent settings. Using the CESM climate model ensemble, we separate out the influence of different levers on ice factory productivity (the ice growth rate), and show that 20th Century and RCP8.5 changes can be skilfully reconstructed by a linear model incorporating 2 m temperature, snow thickness, September sea ice area, total (gross) divergence and ice export. Ocean temperatures, meanwhile, help to explain the timing of the onset of freezing. Increasing air temperatures naturally decrease the growth rate, while positive contributions to growth rate are made by a decreasing September sea ice area, increasing divergence and increasing export. These positive influences are all associated with a thinning, more mobile ice pack: they are negative feedbacks on sea ice loss. In CESM, once the September sea ice area in the Kara-Laptev seas approaches zero, the year-on-year productivity of the ice factories starts to decline. We place these results in the context of observations and discuss the prospects for the productivity of the Arctic Ocean’s ice factories.</p>


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mats Brockstedt Olsen Huserbråten ◽  
Elena Eriksen ◽  
Harald Gjøsæter ◽  
Frode Vikebø

Abstract The Arctic amplification of global warming is causing the Arctic-Atlantic ice edge to retreat at unprecedented rates. Here we show how variability and change in sea ice cover in the Barents Sea, the largest shelf sea of the Arctic, affect the population dynamics of a keystone species of the ice-associated food web, the polar cod (Boreogadus saida). The data-driven biophysical model of polar cod early life stages assembled here predicts a strong mechanistic link between survival and variation in ice cover and temperature, suggesting imminent recruitment collapse should the observed ice-reduction and heating continue. Backtracking of drifting eggs and larvae from observations also demonstrates a northward retreat of one of two clearly defined spawning assemblages, possibly in response to warming. With annual to decadal ice-predictions under development the mechanistic physical-biological links presented here represent a powerful tool for making long-term predictions for the propagation of polar cod stocks.


2011 ◽  
Vol 57 (202) ◽  
pp. 231-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Marsan ◽  
Jérôme Weiss ◽  
Jean-Philippe Métaxian ◽  
Jacques Grangeon ◽  
Pierre-François Roux ◽  
...  

AbstractWe report the detection of bursts of low-frequency waves, typically f = 0.025 Hz, on horizontal channels of broadband seismometers deployed on the Arctic sea-ice cover during the DAMOCLES (Developing Arctic Modeling and Observing Capabilities for Long-term Environmental Studies) experiment in spring 2007. These bursts have amplitudes well above the ambient ice swell and a lower frequency content. Their typical duration is of the order of minutes. They occur at irregular times, with periods of relative quietness alternating with periods of strong activity. A significant correlation between the rate of burst occurrences and the ice-cover deformation at the ∼400 km scale centered on the seismic network suggests that these bursts are caused by remote, episodic deformation involving shearing across regional-scale leads. This observation opens the possibility of complementing satellite measurements of ice-cover deformation, by providing a much more precise temporal sampling, hence a better characterization of the processes involved during these deformation events.


2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 1431-1452 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Jahn ◽  
Kara Sterling ◽  
Marika M. Holland ◽  
Jennifer E. Kay ◽  
James A. Maslanik ◽  
...  

To establish how well the new Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4) simulates the properties of the Arctic sea ice and ocean, results from six CCSM4 twentieth-century ensemble simulations are compared here with the available data. It is found that the CCSM4 simulations capture most of the important climatological features of the Arctic sea ice and ocean state well, among them the sea ice thickness distribution, fraction of multiyear sea ice, and sea ice edge. The strongest bias exists in the simulated spring-to-fall sea ice motion field, the location of the Beaufort Gyre, and the temperature of the deep Arctic Ocean (below 250 m), which are caused by deficiencies in the simulation of the Arctic sea level pressure field and the lack of deep-water formation on the Arctic shelves. The observed decrease in the sea ice extent and the multiyear ice cover is well captured by the CCSM4. It is important to note, however, that the temporal evolution of the simulated Arctic sea ice cover over the satellite era is strongly influenced by internal variability. For example, while one ensemble member shows an even larger decrease in the sea ice extent over 1981–2005 than that observed, two ensemble members show no statistically significant trend over the same period. It is therefore important to compare the observed sea ice extent trend not just with the ensemble mean or a multimodel ensemble mean, but also with individual ensemble members, because of the strong imprint of internal variability on these relatively short trends.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 1361-1380 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Ono ◽  
H. Tatebe ◽  
Y. Komuro

Abstract The mechanisms for and predictability of a drastic reduction in the Arctic sea ice extent (SIE) are investigated using the Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate (MIROC) version 5.2. Here, a control (CTRL) with forcing fixed at year 2000 levels and perfect-model ensemble prediction (PRED) experiments are conducted. In CTRL, three (model years 51, 56, and 57) drastic SIE reductions occur during a 200-yr-long integration. In year 56, the sea ice moves offshore in association with a positive phase of the summer Arctic dipole anomaly (ADA) index and melts due to heat input through the increased open water area, and the SIE drastically decreases. This provides the preconditioning for the lowest SIE in year 57 when the Arctic Ocean interior is in a warm state and the spring sea ice volume has a large negative anomaly due to drastic ice reduction in the previous year. Although the ADA is one of the key mechanisms behind sea ice reduction, it does not always cause a drastic reduction. Our analysis suggests that wind direction favoring offshore ice motion is a more important factor for drastic ice reduction events. In years experiencing drastic ice reduction events, the September SIE can be skillfully predicted in PRED started from July, but not from April. This is because the forecast errors for the July sea level pressure and those for the sea ice concentration and sea ice thickness along the ice edge are large in PRED started from April.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yufei Zou ◽  
Yuhang Wang ◽  
Zuowei Xie ◽  
Hailong Wang ◽  
Philip J. Rasch

Abstract. Recent studies suggested significant impacts of boreal cryosphere changes on wintertime air stagnation and haze pollution extremes in China. However, the underlying mechanism of such a teleconnection relationship remains unclear. Here we used the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (WACCM) to investigate dynamic processes leading to atmospheric circulation and air stagnation responses to Arctic sea ice changes. We conducted four climate sensitivity experiments by perturbing sea ice concentrations (SIC) and corresponding sea surface temperature (SST) in autumn and early winter over the whole Arctic and three sub-regions in the climate model. The results indicate different responses in the general circulation and regional ventilation to the region-specific Arctic changes, with the largest increase of both the probability (by 120 %) and the intensity (by 32 %) of air stagnation extreme events being found in the experiment driven by SIC and SST changes over the Pacific sector of the Arctic (the East Siberian and Chukchi Seas). The increased air stagnation extreme events are mainly driven by an amplified hemispheric-scale atmospheric teleconnection pattern that resembles the negative phase of the Eurasian (EU) pattern. Dynamical diagnostics suggest that convergence of transient eddy forcing in the vicinity of Scandinavia in winter is largely responsible for the amplification of the teleconnection pattern. Transient eddy vorticity fluxes dominate the transient eddy forcing and produce a barotropic anticyclonic anomaly near Scandinavia and wave-train propagation across Eurasia to the downstream regions in East Asia. The piecewise potential vorticity inversion analysis reveals that this long-range atmospheric teleconnection of the Arctic origin takes place primarily in the middle and upper troposphere. The anomalous ridge over East Asia in the middle and upper troposphere worsens regional ventilation conditions by weakening monsoon northwesterlies and enhancing temperature inversion near the surface, leading to more and stronger air stagnation and pollution extremes over eastern China in winter. Ensemble projections based on the state-of-the-art climate models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) corroborate this teleconnection relationship between high-latitude environmental changes and middle-latitude weather extremes, though the tendency and magnitude vary considerably among each participating model.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document