A recent weakening of winter temperature association between Arctic and Asia

Arctic warming and its association with the mid-latitudes have been hot topic over the past two decades. Although many studies have explored these issues it is not clear that how their linkage has changed over time. The results show that winter low tropospheric temperatures in Asia experienced two phases over the past two decades. Phase I (2007/2008 to 2012/2013) was characterized by a warm Arctic and cold Eurasia, and phase II by a warm Arctic and warm Eurasia (2013/2014 to 2018/2019). A strengthened association in winter temperature between the Arctic and Asia occurred during phase I, followed by a weakened linkage during phase II. Simulation experiments forced by observed Arctic sea ice variability largely reproduce observed patterns, suggesting that Arctic sea ice loss contributes to phasic (or low-frequency) variations in winter atmosphere and make the Arctic-Asia temperature association fluctuate over time. The weakening of the Arctic-Asia linkage post-2012/2013 was associated with amplified and expanded Arctic warming. The corresponding anomalies in SLP resembled a positive phase North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) during phase II. This study implies that the phasic warm Arctic-cold Eurasia and warm Arctic-warm Eurasia patterns would alternately happen in the context of Arctic sea ice loss, which increase the difficulty to correctly predict Asian winter temperature.

Stronger Arctic amplification from ozone-depleting substances than from carbon dioxide

Arctic amplification (AA) - the greater warming of the Arctic near-surface temperature relative to its global mean value - is a prominent feature of the climate response to increasing greenhouse gases. Recent work has revealed the importance of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) in contributing to Arctic warming and sea-ice loss. Here, using ensembles of climate model integrations, we expand on that work and directly contrast Arctic warming from ODS to that from carbon dioxide (CO$_2$), over the 1955-2005 period when ODS loading peaked. We find that the Arctic warming and sea-ice loss from ODS are slightly more than half (52-59\%) those from CO$_2$. We further show that the strength of AA for ODS is 1.44 times larger than that for CO$_2$, and that this mainly stems from more positive Planck, albedo, lapse-rate, and cloud feedbacks. Our results suggest that AA would be considerably stronger than presently observed had the Montreal Protocol not been signed.

Comparison of Early Twentieth Century Arctic Warming and Contemporary Arctic Warming in the light of daily and sub-daily data

A review of many studies published since the late 1920s reveals that the main driving mechanisms responsible for the Early Twentieth Century Arctic Warming (ETCAW) are not fully recognized. The main obstacle seems to be our limited knowledge about the climate of this period and some forcings. A deeper knowledge based on greater spatial and temporal resolution data is needed. The article provides new (or improved) knowledge about surface air temperature (SAT) conditions (including their extreme states) in the Arctic during the ETCAW. Daily and sub-daily data have been used (mean daily air temperature, maximum and minimum daily temperature, and diurnal temperature range). These were taken from ten individual years (selected from the period 1934–50) for six meteorological stations representing parts of five Arctic climatic regions. Standard SAT characteristics were analyzed (monthly, seasonal, and yearly means), as were rarely investigated aspects of SAT characteristics (e.g., number of characteristic days; day-to-day temperature variability; and onset, end, and duration of thermal seasons). The results were compared with analogical calculations done for data taken from the Contemporary Arctic Warming (CAW) period (2007–16). The Arctic experienced warming between the ETCAW and the CAW. The magnitude of warming was greatest in the Pacific (2.7 °C) and Canadian Arctic (1.9 °C) regions. A shortening of winter and lengthening of summer were registered. Furthermore, the climate was also a little more continental (except the Russian Arctic) and less stable (greater day-to-day variability and diurnal temperature range) during the ETCAW than during the CAW.

A storyline view of the projected role of remote drivers on summer air stagnation in Europe and the United States

Storylines of atmospheric circulation change, or physically self-consistent narratives of plausible future events, have recently been proposed as a non-probabilistic means to represent uncertainties in climate change projections. Here, we apply the storyline approach to 21st century projections of summer air stagnation over Europe and the United States. We use a CMIP6 ensemble to generate stagnation storylines based on the forced response of three remote drivers of the Northern Hemisphere mid-latitude atmospheric circulation: North Atlantic warming, North Pacific warming, and tropical versus Arctic warming. Under a high radiative forcing scenario (SSP5-8.5), models consistently project increases in stagnation over Europe and the U.S., but the magnitude and spatial distribution of changes vary substantially across CMIP6 ensemble members, suggesting that future projections are not well-constrained when using the ensemble mean alone. We find that the diversity of projected stagnation changes depends on the forced response of remote drivers in individual models. This is especially true in Europe, where differences of ~2 summer stagnant days per degree of global warming are found amongst the different storyline combinations. For example, the greatest projected increase in stagnation for most European regions leads to the smallest increase in stagnation for southwestern Europe; i.e., limited North Atlantic warming combined with near-equitable tropical and Arctic warming. In the U.S., only the atmosphere over the northern Rocky Mountain states demonstrates comparable stagnation projection uncertainty, due to opposite influences of remote drivers on the meteorological conditions that lead to stagnation.

Seasonality in Arctic Warming Driven By Sea Ice Effective Heat Capacity

Arctic surface warming under greenhouse gas forcing peaks in winter and reaches its minimum during summer in both observations and model projections. Many mechanisms have been proposed to explain this seasonal asymmetry, but disentangling these processes remains a challenge in the interpretation of general circulation model (GCM) experiments. To isolate these mechanisms, we use an idealized single-column sea ice model (SCM) which captures the seasonal pattern of Arctic warming. SCM experiments demonstrate that as sea ice melts and exposes open ocean, the accompanying increase in effective surface heat capacity can alone produce the observed pattern of peak warming in early winter (shifting to late winter under increased forcing) by slowing the seasonal heating rate, thus delaying the phase and reducing the amplitude of the seasonal cycle of surface temperature. To investigate warming seasonality in more complex models, we perform GCM experiments that individually isolate sea-ice albedo and thermodynamic effects under CO2 forcing. These also show a key role for the effective heat capacity of sea ice in promoting seasonal asymmetry through suppressing summer warming, in addition to precluding summer climatological inversions and a positive summer lapse-rate feedback. Peak winter warming in GCM experiments is further supported by a positive winter lapse-rate feedback, due to cold initial surface temperatures and strong surface-trapped warming that are enabled by the albedo effects of sea ice alone. While many factors contribute to the seasonal pattern of Arctic warming, these results highlight changes in effective surface heat capacity as a central mechanism supporting this seasonality.

New climate models reveal faster and larger increases in Arctic precipitation than previously projected

As the Arctic continues to warm faster than the rest of the planet, evidence mounts that the region is experiencing unprecedented environmental change. The hydrological cycle is projected to intensify throughout the twenty-first century, with increased evaporation from expanding open water areas and more precipitation. The latest projections from the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) point to more rapid Arctic warming and sea-ice loss by the year 2100 than in previous projections, and consequently, larger and faster changes in the hydrological cycle. Arctic precipitation (rainfall) increases more rapidly in CMIP6 than in CMIP5 due to greater global warming and poleward moisture transport, greater Arctic amplification and sea-ice loss and increased sensitivity of precipitation to Arctic warming. The transition from a snow- to rain-dominated Arctic in the summer and autumn is projected to occur decades earlier and at a lower level of global warming, potentially under 1.5 °C, with profound climatic, ecosystem and socio-economic impacts.

1. The Arctic world

‘The Arctic world’ begins with the definition of the Arctic, which is understood as the land, sea, and ice lying north of the Arctic Circle set at a latitude of approximately 66.5° N. The Arctic tree line is a robust indicator of Arctic-ness as everything to the north is a landscape characterized by shrubs, dwarf trees, and lichen. Arctic warming occurs at least twice as rapidly as the global average, which is a phenomenon known as Arctic amplification. Since 1980, the warming trajectory in the Arctic has been much steeper than that of the rest of the planet.

A dynamic and thermodynamic coupling view of the linkages between Eurasian cooling and Arctic warming

Investigating the contrast between wintertime warming in the Arctic and cooling in Eurasia is of great importance for understanding regional climate change. In this study, we propose a dynamic and thermodynamic coupling view of the linkages between wintertime Arctic warming and Eurasian cooling since 1979. The key factors are the energy budget at the Earth’s surface, the diabatic heating and baroclinicity of the atmosphere, and subsurface ocean heat. A summertime origin of wintertime Arctic warming suggests a partial driving role of the Arctic in wintertime Eurasian cooling. The reasons for this finding are as follows. First, there is a dipole pattern in the diabatic heating change in winter over the Arctic Ocean corresponding to the anticyclonic circulation that links Eurasian cooling and Arctic warming. Second, the change in diabatic heating of the atmosphere is determined by sensible heat at the Earth’s surface through vertical diffusion. Third, the positive sensible heat change in the eastern Arctic sector in winter originates from the summertime enhanced absorption of solar radiation by the subsurface ocean over the sea ice loss region. Meanwhile, the negative sensible heat change in the western Arctic sector and wide Arctic warming can be explained by the circulation development triggered by the change in the east. Additionally, the background strong baroclinicity of the atmosphere in mid-high latitudes and corresponding two-way Arctic and mid-latitude interactions are necessary for circulation development in winter. Furthermore, the seasonality of the changes indicates that Eurasian cooling occurs only in winter because the diabatic heating change in the Arctic is strongest in winter. Overall, the comprehensive mechanisms from the summertime Earth’s surface and subsurface ocean to the wintertime atmosphere suggest a driving role of the Arctic. Note that the situation in interannual variability is more complex than the overall trend because the persistence of the influence of summertime sea ice is weakly established in terms of interannual variability.