Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

David Salas y Melia

Publications and source records attributed to David Salas y Melia.

A multi-model CMIP6-PMIP4 study of Arctic sea ice at 127 ka: sea ice data compilation and model differences

The Last Interglacial period (LIG) is a period with increased summer insolation at high northern latitudes, which results in strong changes in the terrestrial and marine cryosphere. Understanding the mechanisms for this response via climate modelling and comparing the models' representation of climate reconstructions is one of the objectives set up by the Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project for its contribution to the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. Here we analyse the results from 16 climate models in terms of Arctic sea ice. The multi-model mean reduction in minimum sea ice area from the pre industrial period (PI) to the LIG reaches 50 % (multi-model mean LIG area is 3.20×10^6 sq.km, compared to 6.46×10^6 sq.km for the PI). On the other hand, there is little change for the maximum sea ice area (which is 15–16×10^6 sq.km for both the PI and the LIG. To evaluate the model results we synthesise LIG sea ice data from marine cores collected in the Arctic Ocean, Nordic Seas and northern North Atlantic. The reconstructions for the northern North Atlantic show year-round ice-free conditions, and most models yield results in agreement with these reconstructions. Model–data disagreement appear for the sites in the Nordic Seas close to Greenland and at the edge of the Arctic Ocean. The northernmost site with good chronology, for which a sea ice concentration larger than 75 % is reconstructed even in summer, discriminates those models which simulate too little sea ice. However, the remaining models appear to simulate too much sea ice over the two sites south of the northernmost one, for which the reconstructed sea ice cover is seasonal. Hence models either underestimate or overestimate sea ice cover for the LIG, and their bias does not appear to be related to their bias for the pre-industrial period. Drivers for the inter-model differences are different phasing of the up and down short-wave anomalies over the Arctic Ocean, which are associated with differences in model albedo; possible cloud property differences, in terms of optical depth; and LIG ocean circulation changes which occur for some, but not all, LIG simulations. Finally, we note that inter-comparisons between the LIG simulations and simulations for future climate with moderate (1 %/yr) CO2 increase show a relationship between LIG sea ice and sea ice simulated under CO2 increase around the years of doubling CO2. The LIG may therefore yield insight into likely 21st century Arctic sea ice changes using these LIG simulations.

Arctic sea ice↗

North Atlantic Simulations in Coordinated Ocean-Ice Reference Experiments Phase II (CORE-II) : Inter-Annual to Decadal Variability - Part II

Simulated inter-annual to decadal variability and trends in the North Atlantic for the 1958−2007 period from twenty global ocean - sea-ice coupled models are presented. These simulations are performed as contributions to the second phase of the Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (CORE-II). The study is Part II of our companion paper (Danabasoglu et al., 2014) which documented the mean states in the North Atlantic from the same models. A major focus of the present study is the representation of Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) variability in the participating models. Relationships between AMOC variability and those of some other related variables, such as subpolar mixed layer depths, the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), and the Labrador Sea upper-ocean hydrographic properties, are also investigated. In general, AMOC variability shows three distinct stages. During the first stage that lasts until the mid- to late-1970s, AMOC is relatively steady, remaining lower than its long-term (1958−2007) mean. Thereafter, AMOC intensifies with maximum transports achieved in the mid- to late-1990s. This enhancement is then followed by a weakening trend until the end of our integration period. This sequence of low frequency AMOC variability is consistent with previous studies. Regarding strengthening of AMOC between about the mid-1970s and the mid-1990s, our results support a previously identified variability mechanism where AMOC intensification is connected to increased deep water formation in the subpolar North Atlantic, driven by NAO-related surface fluxes. The simulations tend to show general agreement in their representations of, for example, AMOC, sea surface temperature (SST), and subpolar mixed layer depth variabilities. In particular, the observed variability of the North Atlantic SSTs is captured well by all models. These findings indicate that simulated variability and trends are primarily dictated by the atmospheric datasets which include the influence of ocean dynamics from nature superimposed onto anthropogenic effects. Despite these general agreements, there are many differences among the model solutions, particularly in the spatial structures of variability patterns. For example, the location of the maximum AMOC variability differs among the models between Northern and Southern Hemispheres.

Ocean model comparisons↗

North Atlantic Simulations in Coordinated Ocean-Ice Reference Experiments Phase II (CORE-II). Part I: Mean States

Simulation characteristics from eighteen global ocean-sea-ice coupled models are presented with a focus on the mean Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) and other related fields in the North Atlantic. These experiments use inter-annually varying atmospheric forcing data sets for the 60-year period from 1948 to 2007 and are performed as contributions to the second phase of the Coordinated Oceanice Reference Experiments (CORE-II). The protocol for conducting such CORE-II experiments is summarized. Despite using the same atmospheric forcing, the solutions show significant differences. As most models also differ from available observations, biases in the Labrador Sea region in upper-ocean potential temperature and salinity distributions, mixed layer depths, and sea-ice cover are identified as contributors to differences in AMOC. These differences in the solutions do not suggest an obvious grouping of the models based on their ocean model lineage, their vertical coordinate representations, or surface salinity restoring strengths. Thus, the solution differences among the models are attributed primarily to use of different subgrid scale parameterizations and parameter choices as well as to differences in vertical and horizontal grid resolutions in the ocean models. Use of a wide variety of sea-ice models with diverse snow and sea-ice albedo treatments also contributes to these differences. Based on the diagnostics considered, the majority of the models appear suitable for use in studies involving the North Atlantic, but some models require dedicated development effort. atmospheric forcing atmospheric temperatures

ocean model comparisons↗