Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5

The new Max-Planck-Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM) is used in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5) in a series of climate change experiments for either idealized CO2-only forcing or forcings based on observations and the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios. The paper gives an overview of the model configurations, experiments related forcings, and initialization procedures and presents results for the simulated changes in climate and carbon cycle. It is found that the climate feedback depends on the global warming and possibly the forcing history. The global warming from climatological 1850 conditions to 2080–2100 ranges from 1.5°C under the RCP2.6 scenario to 4.4°C under the RCP8.5 scenario. Over this range, the patterns of temperature and precipitation change are nearly independent of the global warming. The model shows a tendency to reduce the ocean heat uptake efficiency toward a warmer climate, and hence acceleration in warming in the later years. The precipitation sensitivity can be as high as 2.5% K−1 if the CO2 concentration is constant, or as small as 1.6% K−1, if the CO2 concentration is increasing. The oceanic uptake of anthropogenic carbon increases over time in all scenarios, being smallest in the experiment forced by RCP2.6 and largest in that for RCP8.5. The land also serves as a net carbon sink in all scenarios, predominantly in boreal regions. The strong tropical carbon sources found in the RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 experiments are almost absent in the RCP4.5 experiment, which can be explained by reforestation in the RCP4.5 scenario.

Aerosol forcing in the Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) simulations by HadGEM2-ES and the role of ammonium nitrate

The latest Hadley Centre climate model, HadGEM2-ES, includes Earth system components such as interactive chemistry and eight species of tropospheric aerosols. It has been run for the period 1860–2100 in support of the fifth phase of the Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). Anthropogenic aerosol emissions peak between 1980 and 2020, resulting in a present-day all-sky top of the atmosphere aerosol forcing of −1.6 and −1.4 W m−2 with and without ammonium nitrate aerosols, respectively, for the sum of direct and first indirect aerosol forcings. Aerosol forcing becomes significantly weaker in the 21st century, being weaker than −0.5 W m−2 in 2100 without nitrate. However, nitrate aerosols become the dominant species in Europe and Asia and decelerate the decrease in global mean aerosol forcing. Considering nitrate aerosols makes aerosol radiative forcing 2–4 times stronger by 2100 depending on the representative concentration pathway, although this impact is lessened when changes in the oxidation properties of the atmosphere are accounted for. Anthropogenic aerosol residence times increase in the future in spite of increased precipitation, as cloud cover and aerosol-cloud interactions decrease in tropical and midlatitude regions. Deposition of fossil fuel black carbon onto snow and ice surfaces peaks during the 20th century in the Arctic and Europe but keeps increasing in the Himalayas until the middle of the 21st century. Results presented here confirm the importance of aerosols in influencing the Earth's climate, albeit with a reduced impact in the future, and suggest that nitrate aerosols will partially replace sulphate aerosols to become an important anthropogenic species in the remainder of the 21st century.

The GCM–Reality Intercomparison Project for SPARC (GRIPS): scientific issues and initial results

To investigate the effects of the middle atmosphere on climate, the World Climate Research Programme is supporting the project "Stratospheric Processes and their Role in Climate" (SPARC). A central theme of SPARC, to examine model simulations of the coupled troposphere—middle atmosphere system, is being performed through the initiative called GRIPS (GCM—Reality Intercomparison Project for SPARC). In this paper, an overview of the objectives of GRIPS is given. Initial activities include an assessment of the performance of middle atmosphere climate models, and preliminary results from this evaluation are presented here. It is shown that although all 13 models evaluated represent most major features of the mean atmospheric state, there are deficiencies in the magnitude and location of the features, which cannot easily be traced to the formulation (resolution or the parameterizations included) of the models. Most models show a cold bias in all locations, apart from the tropical tropopause region where they can be either too warm or too cold. The strengths and locations of the major jets are often misrepresented in the models. Looking at three—dimensional fields reveals, for some models, more severe deficiencies in the magnitude and positioning of the dominant structures (such as the Aleutian high in the stratosphere), although undersampling might explain some of these differences from observations. All the models have shortcomings in their simulations of the present—day climate, which might limit the accuracy of predictions of the climate response to ozone change and other anomalous forcing.

Tropical palaeoclimates at the Last Glacial Maximum: comparison of Palaeoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP)simulations and paleodata.

Seventeen simulations of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) climate have been performed using atmospheric general circulation models (AGCM) in the framework of the Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP). These simulations use the boundary conditions for CO2, insolation and ice-sheets; surface temperatures (SSTs) are either (a) prescribed using CLIMAP data set (eight models) or (b) computed by coupling the AGCM with a slab ocean (nine models). The present-day (PD) tropical climate is correctly depicted by all the models, except the coarser resolution models, and the simulated geographical distribution of annual mean temperature is in good agreement with climatology. Tropical cooling at the LGM is less than at middle and high latitudes, but greatly exceeds the PD temperature variability. The LGM simulations with prescribed SSTs underestimate the observed temperature changes except over equatorial Africa where the models produce a temperature decrease consistent with the data. Our results confirm previous analyses showing that CLIMAP (1981) SSTs only produce a weak terrestrial cooling. When SSTs are computed, the models depict a cooling over the Pacific and Indian oceans in contrast with CLIMAP and most models produce cooler temperatures over land. Moreover four of the nine simulations, produce a cooling in good agreement with terrestrial data. Two of these model results over ocean are consistent with new SST reconstructions whereas two models simulate a homogeneous cooling. Finally, the LGM aridity inferred for most of the tropics from the data, is globally reproduced by the models with a strong underestimation for models using computed SSTs.

Monsoon changes for 6000 years ago: results of 18 simulations from the Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP).

Amplification of the northern hemisphere seasonal cycle of insolation during the mid-Holocene causes a northward shift of the main regions of monsoon precipitation over Africa and India in all 18 simulations conducted for the Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP). Differences among simulations are related to differences in model formulation. Despite qualitative agreement with paleoecological estimates of biome shifts, the magnitude of the monsoon increases over northern Africa are underestimated by all the models.

First look at changes in flood hazard in the inter-sectoral impact model intercomparison project ensemble

Climate change due to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions is expected to increase the frequency and intensity of precipitation events, which is likely to affect the probability of flooding into the future. In this paper we use river flow simulations from nine global hydrology and land surface models to explore uncertainties in the potential impacts of climate change on flood hazard at global scale. As an indicator of flood hazard we looked at changes in the 30-y return level of 5-d average peak flows under representative concentration pathway RCP8.5 at the end of this century. Not everywhere does climate change result in an increase in flood hazard: decreases in the magnitude and frequency of the 30-y return level of river flow occur at roughly one-third (20-45%) of the global land grid points, particularly in areas where the hydro-graph is dominated by the snowmelt flood peak in spring. In most model experiments, however, an increase in flooding frequency was found in more than half of the grid points. The current 30-y flood peak is projected to occur in more than 1 in 5 y across 5-30% of land grid points. The large-scale patterns of change are remarkably consistent among impact models and even the driving climate models, but at local scale and in individual river basins there can be disagreement even on the sign of change, indicating large modeling uncertainty which needs to be taken into account in local adaptation studies.

The Ocean Reanalysis Intercomparison project (ORA-IP)

Uncertainty in ocean analysis methods and deficiencies in the observing system are major obstacles for the reliable reconstruction of the past ocean climate. The variety of existing ocean reanalyses is exploited in a multi-reanalysis ensemble to improve the ocean state estimation and to gauge uncertainty levels. The ensemble-based analysis of signal-to-noise ratio allows the identification of ocean characteristics for which the estimation is robust (such as tropical mixed-layer-depth, upper ocean heat content), and where large uncertainty exists (deep ocean, Southern Ocean, sea ice thickness, salinity), providing guidance for future enhancement of the observing and data assimilation systems.

PMIP4-CMIP6: the contribution of the Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project to CMIP6

The goal of the Palaeoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project (PMIP) is to understand the response of the climate system to changes in different climate forcings and to feedbacks. Through comparison with observations of the environmental impacts of these climate changes, or with climate reconstructions based on physical, chemical or biological records, PMIP also addresses the issue of how well state-of-the-art models simulate climate changes. Palaeoclimate states are radically different from those of the recent past documented by the instrumental record and thus provide an out-of-sample test of the models used for future climate projections and a way to assess whether they have the correct sensitivity to forcings and feedbacks. Five distinctly different periods have been selected as focus for the core palaeoclimate experiments that are designed to contribute to the objectives of the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). This manuscript describes the motivation for the choice of these periods and the design of the numerical experiments, with a focus upon their novel features compared to the experiments performed in previous phases of PMIP and CMIP as well as the benefits of common analyses of the models across multiple climate states. It also describes the information needed to document each experiment and the model outputs required for analysis and benchmarking.

Experimental and diagnostic protocol for the physical component of the CMIP6 Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP)

The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) aims to provide a framework for evaluating, understanding, and improving the ocean and sea-ice components of global climate and earth system models contributing to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). OMIP addresses these aims in two complementary manners: (A) by providing an experimental protocol for global ocean/sea-ice models run with a prescribed atmospheric forcing, (B) by providing a protocol for ocean diagnostics to be saved as part of CMIP6. We focus here on the physical component of OMIP, with a companion paper (Orr et al., 2016) offering details for the inert chemistry and interactive biogeochemistry. The physical portion of the OMIP experimental protocol follows that of the interannual Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (CORE-II). Since 2009, CORE-I (Normal Year Forcing) and CORE-II have become the standard method to evaluate global ocean/sea-ice simulations and to examine mechanisms for forced ocean climate variability. The OMIP diagnostic protocol is relevant for any ocean model component of CMIP6, including the DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima experiments), historical simulations, FAFMIP (Flux Anomaly Forced MIP), C4MIP (Coupled Carbon Cycle Climate MIP), DAMIP (Detection and Attribution MIP), DCPP (Decadal Climate Prediction Project), ScenarioMIP (Scenario MIP), as well as the ocean-sea ice OMIP simulations. The bulk of this paper offers scientific rationale for saving these diagnostics.

OMIP contribution to CMIP6: experimental and diagnostic protocol for the physical component of the Ocean Model Intercomparison Project

The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) is an endorsed project in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). OMIP addresses CMIP6 science questions, investigating the origins and consequences of systematic model biases. It does so by providing a framework for evaluating (including assessment of systematic biases), understanding, and improving ocean, sea-ice, tracer, and biogeochemical components of climate and earth system models contributing to CMIP6. Among the WCRP Grand Challenges in climate science (GCs), OMIP primarily contributes to the regional sea level change and near-term (climate/decadal) prediction GCs. OMIP provides (a) an experimental protocol for global ocean/sea-ice models run with a prescribed atmospheric forcing; and (b) a protocol for ocean diagnostics to be saved as part of CMIP6. We focus here on the physical component of OMIP, with a companion paper (Orr et al., 2016) detailing methods for the inert chemistry and interactive biogeochemistry. The physical portion of the OMIP experimental protocol follows the interannual Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (CORE-II). Since 2009, CORE-I (Normal Year Forcing) and CORE-II (Interannual Forcing) have become the standard methods to evaluate global ocean/sea-ice simulations and to examine mechanisms for forced ocean climate variability. The OMIP diagnostic protocol is relevant for any ocean model component of CMIP6, including the DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima experiments), historical simulations, FAFMIP (Flux Anomaly Forced MIP), C4MIP (Coupled Carbon Cycle Climate MIP), DAMIP (Detection and Attribution MIP), DCPP (Decadal Climate Prediction Project), ScenarioMIP, HighResMIP (High Resolution MIP), as well as the ocean/sea-ice OMIP simulations.

Intercomparison of the Arctic sea ice cover in global ocean–sea ice reanalyses from the ORA-IP project

Ocean–sea ice reanalyses are crucial for assessing the variability and recent trends in the Arctic sea ice cover. This is especially true for sea ice volume, as long-term and large scale sea ice thickness observations are inexistent. Results from the Ocean ReAnalyses Intercomparison Project (ORA-IP) are presented, with a focus on Arctic sea ice fields reconstructed by state-of-the-art global ocean reanalyses. Differences between the various reanalyses are explored in terms of the effects of data assimilation, model physics and atmospheric forcing on properties of the sea ice cover, including concentration, thickness, velocity and snow. Amongst the 14 reanalyses studied here, 9 assimilate sea ice concentration, and none assimilate sea ice thickness data. The comparison reveals an overall agreement in the reconstructed concentration fields, mainly because of the constraints in surface temperature imposed by direct assimilation of ocean observations, prescribed or assimilated atmospheric forcing and assimilation of sea ice concentration. However, some spread still exists amongst the reanalyses, due to a variety of factors. In particular, a large spread in sea ice thickness is found within the ensemble of reanalyses, partially caused by the biases inherited from their sea ice model components. Biases are also affected by the assimilation of sea ice concentration and the treatment of sea ice thickness in the data assimilation process. An important outcome of this study is that the spatial distribution of ice volume varies widely between products, with no reanalysis standing out as clearly superior as compared to altimetry estimates. The ice thickness from systems without assimilation of sea ice concentration is not worse than that from systems constrained with sea ice observations. An evaluation of the sea ice velocity fields reveals that ice drifts too fast in most systems. As an ensemble, the ORA-IP reanalyses capture trends in Arctic sea ice area and extent relatively well. However, the ensemble can not be used to get a robust estimate of recent trends in the Arctic sea ice volume. Biases in the reanalyses certainly impact the simulated air–sea fluxes in the polar regions, and questions the suitability of current sea ice reanalyses to initialize seasonal forecasts.

The METAFOR project: preserving data through metadata standards for climate models and simulations

Climate modeling is a complex process, requiring accurate and complete metadata in order to identify, assess and use climate data stored in digital repositories. The preservation of such data is increasingly important given the development of ever-increasingly complex models to predict the effects of global climate change. The EU METAFOR project has developed a Common Information Model (CIM) to describe climate data and the models and modelling environments that produce this data. There is a wide degree of variability between different climate models and modelling groups. To accommodate this, the CIM has been designed to be highly generic and flexible, with extensibility built in. METAFOR describes the climate modelling process simply as "an activity undertaken using software on computers to produce data." This process has been described as separate UML packages (and, ultimately, XML schemas). This fairly generic structure canbe paired with more specific "controlled vocabularies" in order to restrict the range of valid CIM instances. The CIM will aid digital preservation of climate models as it will provide an accepted standard structure for the model metadata. Tools to write and manage CIM instances, and to allow convenient and powerful searches of CIM databases,. Are also under development. Community buy-in of the CIM has been achieved through a continual process of consultation with the climate modelling community, and through the METAFOR team’s development of a questionnaire that will be used to collect the metadata for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) model runs.