The ocean's gravitational potential energy budget in a coupled climate model

This study examines, in a unified fashion, the budgets of ocean gravitational potential energy (GPE) and available gravitational potential energy (AGPE) in the control simulation of the coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation model HadCM3. Only AGPE can be converted into kinetic energy by adiabatic processes. Diapycnal mixing supplies GPE, but not AGPE, whereas the reverse is true of the combined effect of surface buoyancy forcing and convection. Mixing and buoyancy forcing, thus, play complementary roles in sustaining the large scale circulation. However, the largest globally integrated source of GPE is resolved advection (+0.57 TW) and the largest sink is through parameterized eddy transports (-0.82 TW). The effect of these adiabatic processes on AGPE is identical to their effect on GPE, except for perturbations to both budgets due to numerical leakage exacerbated by non-linearities in the equation of state.

The extreme European summer 2012

The European summer of 2012 was marked by strongly contrasting rainfall anomalies, which led to flooding in northern Europe and droughts and wildfires in southern Europe. This season was not an isolated event, rather the latest in a string of summers characterized by a southward shifted Atlantic storm track as described by the negative phase of the SNAO. The degree of decadal variability in these features suggests a role for forcing from outside the dynamical atmosphere, and preliminary numerical experiments suggest that the global SST and low Arctic sea ice extent anomalies are likely to have played a role and that warm North Atlantic SSTs were a particular contributing factor. The direct effects of changes in radiative forcing from greenhouse gas and aerosol forcing are not included in these experiments, but both anthropogenic forcing and natural variability may have influenced the SST and sea ice changes.

Have greenhouse gases intensified the contrast between wet and dry regions?

While changes in land precipitation during the last 50 years have been attributed in part to human influences, results vary by season, are affected by data uncertainty and do not account for changes over ocean. One of the more physically robust responses of the water cycle to warming is the expected amplification of existing patterns of precipitation minus evaporation. Here, precipitation changes in wet and dry regions are analyzed from satellite data for 1988–2010, covering land and ocean. We derive fingerprints for the expected change from climate model simulations that separately track changes in wet and dry regions. The simulations used are driven with anthropogenic and natural forcings combined, and greenhouse gas forcing or natural forcing only. Results of detection and attribution analysis show that the fingerprint of combined external forcing is detectable in observations and that this intensification of the water cycle is partly attributable to greenhouse gas forcing.

Present state of global wetland extent and wetland methane modelling: conclusions from a model inter-comparison project (WETCHIMP)

Global wetlands are believed to be climate sensitive, and are the largest natural emitters of methane (CH4). Increased wetland CH4 emissions could act as a positive feedback to future warming. The Wetland and Wetland CH4 Inter-comparison of Models Project (WETCHIMP) investigated our present ability to simulate large-scale wetland characteristics and corresponding CH4 emissions. To ensure inter-comparability, we used a common experimental protocol driving all models with the same climate and carbon dioxide (CO2) forcing datasets. The WETCHIMP experiments were conducted for model equilibrium states as well as transient simulations covering the last century. Sensitivity experiments investigated model response to changes in selected forcing inputs (precipitation, temperature, and atmospheric CO2 concentration). Ten models participated, covering the spectrum from simple to relatively complex, including models tailored either for regional or global simulations. The models also varied in methods to calculate wetland size and location, with some models simulating wetland area prognostically, while other models relied on remotely sensed inundation datasets, or an approach intermediate between the two. Four major conclusions emerged from the project. First, the suite of models demonstrate extensive disagreement in their simulations of wetland areal extent and CH4 emissions, in both space and time. Simple metrics of wetland area, such as the latitudinal gradient, show large variability, principally between models that use inundation dataset information and those that independently determine wetland area. Agreement between the models improves for zonally summed CH4 emissions, but large variation between the models remains. For annual global CH4 emissions, the models vary by ±40% of the all-model mean (190 Tg CH4 yr−1). Second, all models show a strong positive response to increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations (857 ppm) in both CH4 emissions and wetland area. In response to increasing global temperatures (+3.4 °C globally spatially uniform), on average, the models decreased wetland area and CH4 fluxes, primarily in the tropics, but the magnitude and sign of the response varied greatly. Models were least sensitive to increased global precipitation (+3.9 % globally spatially uniform) with a consistent small positive response in CH4 fluxes and wetland area. Results from the 20th century transient simulation show that interactions between climate forcings could have strong non-linear effects. Third, we presently do not have sufficient wetland methane observation datasets adequate to evaluate model fluxes at a spatial scale comparable to model grid cells (commonly 0.5°). This limitation severely restricts our ability to model global wetland CH4 emissions with confidence. Our simulated wetland extents are also difficult to evaluate due to extensive disagreements between wetland mapping and remotely sensed inundation datasets. Fourth, the large range in predicted CH4 emission rates leads to the conclusion that there is both substantial parameter and structural uncertainty in large-scale CH4 emission models, even after uncertainties in wetland areas are accounted for.

Assessing the benefits of crop albedo bio-geoengineering

It has been proposed that growing crop varieties with higher canopy albedo would lower summer-time temperatures over North America and Eurasia and provide a partial mitigation of global warming ('bio-geoengineering') (Ridgwell et al 2009 Curr. Biol. 19 1–5). Here, we use a coupled ocean–atmosphere–vegetation model (HadCM3) with prescribed agricultural regions, to investigate to what extent the regional effectiveness of crop albedo bio-geoengineering might be influenced by a progressively warming climate as well as assessing the impacts on regional hydrological cycling and primary productivity. Consistent with previous analysis, we find that the averted warming due to increasing crop canopy albedo by 0.04 is regionally and seasonally specific, with the largest cooling of ~1 °C for Europe in summer whereas in the low latitude monsoonal SE Asian regions of high density cropland, the greatest cooling is experienced in winter. In this study we identify potentially important positive impacts of increasing crop canopy albedo on soil moisture and primary productivity in European cropland regions, due to seasonal increases in precipitation. We also find that the background climate state has an important influence on the predicted regional effectiveness of bio-geoengineering on societally-relevant timescales (ca 100 years). The degree of natural climate variability and its dependence on greenhouse forcing that are evident in our simulations highlights the difficulties faced in the detection and verification of climate mitigation in geoengineering schemes. However, despite the small global impact, regionally focused schemes such as crop albedo bio-geoengineering have detection advantages.

Present state of global wetland extent and wetland methane modelling: methodology of a model inter-comparison project (WETCHIMP)

The Wetland and Wetland CH4 Intercomparison of Models Project (WETCHIMP) was created to evaluate our present ability to simulate large-scale wetland characteristics and corresponding methane (CH4) emissions. A multi-model comparison is essential to evaluate the key uncertainties in the mechanisms and parameters leading to methane emissions. Ten modelling groups joined WETCHIMP to run eight global and two regional models with a common experimental protocol using the same climate and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) forcing datasets. We reported the main conclusions from the intercomparison effort in a companion paper (Melton et al., 2013). Here we provide technical details for the six experiments, which included an equilibrium, a transient, and an optimized run plus three sensitivity experiments (temperature, precipitation, and atmospheric CO2 concentration). The diversity of approaches used by the models is summarized through a series of conceptual figures, and is used to evaluate the wide range of wetland extent and CH4 fluxes predicted by the models in the equilibrium run. We discuss relationships among the various approaches and patterns in consistencies of these model predictions. Within this group of models, there are three broad classes of methods used to estimate wetland extent: prescribed based on wetland distribution maps, prognostic relationships between hydrological states based on satellite observations, and explicit hydrological mass balances. A larger variety of approaches was used to estimate the net CH4 fluxes from wetland systems. Even though modelling of wetland extent and CH4 emissions has progressed significantly over recent decades, large uncertainties still exist when estimating CH4 emissions: there is little consensus on model structure or complexity due to knowledge gaps, different aims of the models, and the range of temporal and spatial resolutions of the models.