Engineering topics

Schmidt, Gavin A.

Publications and source records attributed to Schmidt, Gavin A..

At least 19 records

DOE OSTI2024

Envisioning U.S. Climate Predictions and Projections to Meet New Challenges

In the face of a changing climate, the understanding, predictions, and projections of natural and human systems are increasingly crucial to prepare and cope with extremes and cascading hazards, determine unexpected feedbacks and potential tipping points, inform long-term adaptation strategies, and guide mitigation approaches. Increasingly complex socio-economic systems require enhanced predictive information to support advanced practices. Such new predictive challenges drive the need to fully capitalize on ambitious scientific and technological opportunities. These include the unrealized potential for very high-resolution modeling of global-to-local Earth system processes across timescales, reduction of model biases, enhanced integration of human systems and the Earth Systems, better quantification of predictability and uncertainties; expedited science-to-service pathways, and co-production of actionable information with stakeholders. Enabling technological opportunities include exascale computing, advanced data storage, novel observations and powerful data analytics, including artificial intelligence and machine learning. Looking to generate community discussions on how to accelerate progress on U.S. climate predictions and projections, representatives of Federally-funded U.S. modeling groups outline here perspectives on a six-pillar national approach grounded in climate science that builds on the strengths of the U.S. modeling community and agency goals. This calls for an unprecedented level of coordination to capitalize on transformative opportunities, augmenting and complementing current modeling center capabilities and plans to support agency missions. Tangible outcomes include projections with horizontal spatial resolutions finer than 10 km, representing extremes and associated risks in greater detail, reduced model errors, better predictability estimates, and more customized projections to support next generation climate services.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

CERESMIP: a climate modeling protocol to investigate recent trends in the Earth's Energy Imbalance

The Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) project has now produced over two decades of observed data on the Earth's Energy Imbalance (EEI) and has revealed substantive trends in both the reflected shortwave and outgoing longwave top-of-atmosphere radiation components. Available climate model simulations suggest that these trends are incompatible with purely internal variability, but that the full magnitude and breakdown of the trends are outside of the model ranges. Unfortunately, the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (Phase 6) (CMIP6) protocol only uses observed forcings to 2014 (and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) projections thereafter), and furthermore, many of the ‘observed' drivers have been updated substantially since the CMIP6 inputs were defined. Most notably, the sea surface temperature (SST) estimates have been revised and now show up to 50% greater trends since 1979, particularly in the southern hemisphere. Additionally, estimates of short-lived aerosol and gas-phase emissions have been substantially updated. These revisions will likely have material impacts on the model-simulated EEI. We therefore propose a new, relatively low-cost, model intercomparison, CERESMIP, that would target the CERES period (2000-present), with updated forcings to at least the end of 2021. The focus will be on atmosphere-only simulations, using updated SST, forcings and emissions from 1990 to 2021. The key metrics of interest will be the EEI and atmospheric feedbacks, and so the analysis will benefit from output from satellite cloud observation simulators. The Tier 1 request would consist only of an ensemble of AMIP-style simulations, while the Tier 2 request would encompass uncertainties in the applied forcing, atmospheric composition, single and all-but-one forcing responses. We present some preliminary results and invite participation from a wide group of models.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Comparison of equilibrium climate sensitivity estimates from slab ocean, 150-year, and longer simulations

We compare equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) estimates from pairs of long (= 800-year) control and abruptly quadrupled CO2 simulations with shorter (150, 300 year) coupled atmosphere-ocean simulations and Slab Ocean Models (SOM). Consistent with previous work, ECS estimates from shorter coupled simulations based on annual averages for years 1-150 underestimate those from SOM (-8% ± 13%) and long (-14% ± 8%) simulations. Analysis of only years 21-150 improved agreement with SOM (-2% ± 14%) and long (-8% ± 10%) estimates. Use of pentadal averages for years 51-150 results in improved agreement with long simulations (-4% ± 11%). While ECS estimates from current generation US models based on SOM and coupled annual averages of years 1-150 range from 2.6°C to 5.3°C, estimates based longer simulations of the same models range from 3.2°C to 7.0°C. Such variations between methods argues for caution in comparison and interpretation of ECS estimates across models.

Dunne, John P.↗

DOE OSTI2020

Representation of Modes of Variability in Six U.S. Climate Models

We compare the performance of several modes of variability across six U.S. climate modeling groups, with a focus on identifying robust improvements in recent models [including those participating in phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP)] compared to previous versions. In particular, we examine the representation of the Madden–Julian oscillation (MJO), El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO), the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) in the tropical stratosphere, and the dominant modes of extratropical variability, including the southern annular mode (SAM), the northern annular mode (NAM) [and the closely related North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO)], and the Pacific–North American pattern (PNA). Where feasible, we explore the processes driving these improvements through the use of “intermediary” experiments that utilize model versions between CMIP3/5 and CMIP6 as well as targeted sensitivity experiments in which individual modeling parameters are altered. We find clear and systematic improvements in the MJO and QBO and in the teleconnection patterns associated with the PDO and ENSO. Some gains arise from better process representation, while others (e.g., the QBO) from higher resolution that allows for a greater range of interactions. Our results demonstrate that the incremental development processes in multiple climate model groups lead to more realistic simulations over time.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

An assessment of Earth's climate sensitivity using multiple lines of evidence

In this work, we assess evidence relevant to Earth's equilibrium climate sensitivity per doubling of atmospheric CO 2 , characterized by an effective sensitivity S . This evidence includes feedback process understanding, the historical climate record, and the paleoclimate record. An S value lower than 2 K is difficult to reconcile with any of the three lines of evidence. The amount of cooling during the Last Glacial Maximum provides strong evidence against values of S greater than 4.5 K. Other lines of evidence in combination also show that this is relatively unlikely. We use a Bayesian approach to produce a probability density (PDF) for S given all the evidence, including tests of robustness to difficult-to-quantify uncertainties and different priors. The 66% range is 2.6-3.9 K for our Baseline calculation, and remains within 2.3-4.5 K under the robustness tests; corresponding 5-95% ranges are 2.3-4.7 K, bounded by 2.0-5.7 K (although such high-confidence ranges should be regarded more cautiously). This indicates a stronger constraint on S than reported in past assessments, by lifting the low end of the range. This narrowing occurs because the three lines of evidence agree and are judged to be largely independent, and because of greater confidence in understanding feedback processes and in combining evidence. We identify promising avenues for further narrowing the range in S , in particular using comprehensive models and process understanding to address limitations in the traditional forcing-feedback paradigm for interpreting past changes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2019

ESD Reviews: Model Dependence in Multi-Model Climate Ensembles: Weighting, Sub-Selection and Out-Of-Sample Testing

The rationale for using multi-model ensembles in climate change projections and impacts research is often based on the expectation that different models constitute independent estimates; therefore, a range of models allows a better characterisation of the uncertainties in the representation of the climate system than a single model. However, it is known that research groups share literature, ideas for representations of processes, parameterisations, evaluation data sets and even sections of model code. Thus, nominally different models might have similar biases because of similarities in the way they represent a subset of processes, or even be near-duplicates of others, weakening the assumption that they constitute independent estimates. If there are near-replicates of some models, then treating all models equally is likely to bias the inferences made using these ensembles. The challenge is to establish the degree to which this might be true for any given application. While this issue is recognised by many in the community, quantifying and accounting for model dependence in anything other than an ad-hoc way is challenging. Here we present a synthesis of the range of disparate attempts to define, quantify and address model dependence in multi-model climate ensembles in a common conceptual framework, and provide guidance on how users can test the efficacy of approaches that move beyond the equally weighted ensemble. In the upcoming Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6), several new models that are closely related to existing models are anticipated, as well as large ensembles from some models. We argue that quantitatively accounting for dependence in addition to model performance, and thoroughly testing the effectiveness of the approach used will be key to a sound interpretation of the CMIP ensembles in future scientific studies.

Abramowitz, Gab↗

NASA NTRS2018

The PMIP4 Contribution to CMIP6 - Part 1: Overview and Over-Arching Analysis Plan

This paper is the first of a series of four GMD (Geoscientific Model Development) papers on the PMIP4-CMIP6 (Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project - Phase 4 -- Coupled Model Intercomparison Project - Phase 6) experiments. Part 2 (Otto-Bliesner et al., 2017) gives details about the two PMIP4-CMIP6 interglacial experiments, Part 3 (Jungclaus et al., 2017) about the last millennium experiment, and Part 4 (Kageyama et al., 2017) about the Last Glacial Maximum experiment. The mid-Pliocene Warm Period experiment is part of the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP) - Phase 2, detailed in Haywood et al. (2016). The goal of the Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project (PMIP) is to understand the response of the climate system to different climate forcings for documented climatic states very different from the present and historical climates. Through comparison with observations of the environmental impact 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 numerical models simulate climate change. Climate models are usually developed using the present and historical climates as references, but climate projections show that future climates will lie well outside these conditions. Palaeoclimates very different from these reference states therefore provide stringent tests for state-of-the-art models and a way to assess whether their sensitivity to forcings is compatible with palaeoclimatic evidence. Simulations of five different periods have been designed to address the objectives of the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6): the millennium prior to the industrial epoch (CMIP6 name: past1000); the mid-Holocene, 6000 years ago (midHolocene); the Last Glacial Maximum, 21,000 years ago (lgm); the Last Interglacial, 127,000 years ago (lig127k); and the mid-Pliocene Warm Period, 3.2 million years ago (midPliocene-eoi400). These climatic periods are well documented by palaeoclimatic and palaeoenvironmental records, with climate and environmental changes relevant for the study and projection of future climate changes. This paper describes the motivation for the choice of these periods and the design of the numerical experiments and database requests, with a focus on their novel features compared to the experiments performed in previous phases of PMIP and CMIP. It also outlines the analysis plan that takes advantage of the comparisons of the results across periods and across CMIP6 in collaboration with other MIPs.

climate↗

NASA NTRS2018

Internal Variability and Disequilibrium Confound Estimates of Climate Sensitivity from Observations

An emerging literature suggests that estimates of equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) derived from recent observations and energy balance models are biased low because models project more positive climate feedback in the far future. Here we use simulations from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) to show that across models, ECS inferred from the recent historical period (1979-2005) is indeed almost uniformly lower than that inferred from simulations subject to abrupt increases in CO2-radiative forcing. However, ECS inferred from simulations in which sea surface temperatures are prescribed according to observations is lower still. ECS inferred from simulations with prescribed sea surface temperatures is strongly linked to changes to tropical marine low clouds. However, feedbacks from these clouds are a weak constraint on long-term model ECS. One interpretation is that observations of recent climate changes constitute a poor direct proxy for long-term sensitivity.

Marvel, Kate↗

NASA NTRS2017

Comparing Proxy and Model Estimates of Hydroclimate Variability and Change over the Common Era

Water availability is fundamental to societies and ecosystems, but our understanding of variations in hydroclimate (including extreme events, flooding, and decadal periods of drought) is limited because of a paucity of modern instrumental observations that are distributed unevenly across the globe and only span parts of the 20th and 21st centuries. Such data coverage is insufficient for characterizing hydroclimate and its associated dynamics because of its multidecadal to centennial variability and highly regionalized spatial signature. High-resolution (seasonal to decadal) hydroclimatic proxies that span all or parts of the Common Era (CE) and paleoclimate simulations from climate models are therefore important tools for augmenting our understanding of hydroclimate variability. In particular, the comparison of the two sources of information is critical for addressing the uncertainties and limitations of both while enriching each of their interpretations. We review the principal proxy data available for hydroclimatic reconstructions over the CE and highlight the contemporary understanding of how these proxies are interpreted as hydroclimate indicators. We also review the available last-millennium simulations from fully coupled climate models and discuss several outstanding challenges associated with simulating hydroclimate variability and change over the CE. A specific review of simulated hydroclimatic changes forced by volcanic events is provided, as is a discussion of expected improvements in estimated radiative forcings, models, and their implementation in the future. Our review of hydroclimatic proxies and last-millennium model simulations is used as the basis for articulating a variety of considerations and best practices for how to perform proxy-model comparisons of CE hydroclimate. This discussion provides a framework for how best to evaluate hydroclimate variability and its associated dynamics using these comparisons and how they can better inform interpretations of both proxy data and model simulations.We subsequently explore means of using proxy-model comparisons to better constrain and characterize future hydroclimate risks. This is explored specifically in the context of several examples that demonstrate how proxy-model comparisons can be used to quantitatively constrain future hydroclimatic risks as estimated from climate model projections.

Common Era↗

NASA NTRS2015

Sensitivity to Factors Underlying the Hiatus

Recent trends in global mean surface air temperature fall outside the 90 range predicted by models using the CMIP5 forcings and scenarios; this recent period of muted warming is dubbed the hiatus. The hiatus has attracted broad attention in both the popular press and the scientific literature, primarily because of its perceived implications for understanding long-term trends. Many hypotheses have been offered to explain the warming slowdown during the hiatus, and comprehensive studies of this period across multiple variables and spatial scales will likely improve our understanding of the physical mechanisms driving global temperature change and variability.We argue, however, that decadal temperature trends by themselves are unlikely to constrain future trajectories of global mean temperature and that the hiatus does not significantly revise our understanding of overall climate sensitivity. Instead, we demonstrate that, because of the poorly constrained nature of the hiatus, model-observation disagreements over this period may be resolvable via uncertainties in the observations, modeled internal variability, forcing estimates, or (more likely) some combination of all three factors. We define the hiatus interval as 1998-2012, endpoints judiciously chosen to minimize observed warming by including the large 1998 El Nio event and excluding 2014, an exceptionally warm year. Such choices are fundamentally subjective and cannot be considered random, so any probabilistic statements regarding the likelihood of this occurring need to be made carefully. Using this definition, the observed global temperature trend estimates from four datasets fall outside the 5-95 interval predicted by the CMIP5 models. Here we explore some of the plausible explanations for this discrepancy, and show that no unique explanation is likely to fully account for the hiatus.

trends↗

NASA NTRS2014

A Practical Philosophy of Complex Climate Modelling

We give an overview of the practice of developing and using complex climate models, as seen from experiences in a major climate modelling center and through participation in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP).We discuss the construction and calibration of models; their evaluation, especially through use of out-of-sample tests; and their exploitation in multi-model ensembles to identify biases and make predictions. We stress that adequacy or utility of climate models is best assessed via their skill against more naive predictions. The framework we use for making inferences about reality using simulations is naturally Bayesian (in an informal sense), and has many points of contact with more familiar examples of scientific epistemology. While the use of complex simulations in science is a development that changes much in how science is done in practice, we argue that the concepts being applied fit very much into traditional practices of the scientific method, albeit those more often associated with laboratory work.

complex simulation↗

NASA NTRS2014

The QBO in Two GISS Global Climate Models: 1. Generation of the QBO

The adjustment of parameterized gravity waves associated with model convection and finer vertical resolution has made possible the generation of the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) in two Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) models, GISS Middle Atmosphere Global Climate Model III and a climate/middle atmosphere version of Model E2. Both extend from the surface to 0.002 hPa, with 2deg × 2.5deg resolution and 102 layers. Many realistic features of the QBO are simulated, including magnitude and variability of its period and amplitude. The period itself is affected by the magnitude of parameterized convective gravity wave momentum fluxes and interactive ozone (which also affects the QBO amplitude and variability), among other forcings. Although varying sea surface temperatures affect the parameterized momentum fluxes, neither aspect is responsible for the modeled variation in QBO period. Both the parameterized and resolved waves act to produce the respective easterly and westerly wind descent, although their effect is offset in altitude at each level. The modeled and observed QBO influences on tracers in the stratosphere, such as ozone, methane, and water vapor are also discussed. Due to the link between the gravity wave parameterization and the models' convection, and the dependence on the ozone field, the models may also be used to investigate how the QBO may vary with climate change.

middle atmosphere dynamics↗

NASA NTRS2014

Comparison of Forced ENSO-Like Hydrological Expressions in Simulations of the Preindustrial and Mid-Holocene

Using the water isotope- and vapor source distribution (VSD) tracer-enabled Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE-R, we examine changing El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO)-like expressions in the hydrological cycle in a suite of model experiments. We apply strong surface temperature anomalies associated with composite observed El Nino and La Nina events as surface boundary conditions to preindustrial and mid-Holocene model experiments in order to investigate ENSO-like expressions in the hydrological cycle under varying boundary conditions. We find distinct simulated hydrological anomalies associated with El Nino-like ("ENSOWARM") and La Nina-like ("ENSOCOOL") conditions, and the region-specific VSD tracers show hydrological differences across the Pacific basin between El Nino-like and La Nina-like events. The application of ENSOCOOL forcings does not produce climatological anomalies that represent the equal but opposite impacts of the ENSOWARM experiment, as the isotopic anomalies associated with ENSOWARM conditions are generally stronger than with ENSOCOOL and the spatial patterns of change distinct. Also, when the same ENSO-like surface temperature anomalies are imposed on the mid-Holocene, the hydrological response is muted, relative to the preindustrial. Mid-Holocene changes in moisture sources to the analyzed regions across the Pacific reveal potentially complex relationships between ENSO-like conditions and boundary conditions. Given the complex impacts of ENSO-like conditions on various aspects of the hydrological cycle, we suggest that proxy record insights into paleo-ENSO variability are most likely to be robust when synthesized from a network of many spatially diverse archives, which can account for the potential nonstationarity of ENSO teleconnections under different boundary conditions.

boundary conditions↗

NASA NTRS2014

Climate Change: On Scientists and Advocacy

Last year, I asked a crowd of a few hundred geoscientists from around the world what positions related to climate science and policy they would be comfortable publicly advocating. I presented a list of recommendations that included increased research funding, greater resources for education, and specific emission reduction technologies. In almost every case, a majority of the audience felt comfortable arguing for them. The only clear exceptions were related to geo-engineering research and nuclear power. I had queried the researchers because the relationship between science and advocacy is marked by many assumptions and little clarity. This despite the fact that the basic question of how scientists can be responsible advocates on issues related to their expertise has been discussed for decades most notably in the case of climate change by the late Stephen Schneider.

climate change↗

NASA NTRS2014

Reconciling Warming Trends

Climate models projected stronger warming over the past 15 years than has been seen in observations. Conspiring factors of errors in volcanic and solar inputs, representations of aerosols, and El NiNo evolution, may explain most of the discrepancy.

Climate models↗

NASA NTRS2014

Volcanic Contribution to Decadal Changes in Tropospheric Temperature

Despite continued growth in atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases, global mean surface and tropospheric temperatures have shown slower warming since 1998 than previously. Possible explanations for the slow-down include internal climate variability, external cooling influences and observational errors. Several recent modelling studies have examined the contribution of early twenty-first-century volcanic eruptions to the muted surface warming. Here we present a detailed analysis of the impact of recent volcanic forcing on tropospheric temperature, based on observations as well as climate model simulations. We identify statistically significant correlations between observations of stratospheric aerosol optical depth and satellite-based estimates of both tropospheric temperature and short-wave fluxes at the top of the atmosphere. We show that climate model simulations without the effects of early twenty-first-century volcanic eruptions overestimate the tropospheric warming observed since 1998. In two simulations with more realistic volcanic influences following the 1991 Pinatubo eruption, differences between simulated and observed tropospheric temperature trends over the period 1998 to 2012 are up to 15% smaller, with large uncertainties in the magnitude of the effect. To reduce these uncertainties, better observations of eruption-specific properties of volcanic aerosols are needed, as well as improved representation of these eruption-specific properties in climate model simulations.

Atmospheric temperature↗

NASA NTRS2014

Configuration and Assessment of the GISS ModelE2 Contributions to the CMIP5 Archive

We present a description of the ModelE2 version of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) General Circulation Model (GCM) and the configurations used in the simulations performed for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5). We use six variations related to the treatment of the atmospheric composition, the calculation of aerosol indirect effects, and ocean model component. Specifically, we test the difference between atmospheric models that have noninteractive composition, where radiatively important aerosols and ozone are prescribed from precomputed decadal averages, and interactive versions where atmospheric chemistry and aerosols are calculated given decadally varying emissions. The impact of the first aerosol indirect effect on clouds is either specified using a simple tuning, or parameterized using a cloud microphysics scheme. We also use two dynamic ocean components: the Russell and HYbrid Coordinate Ocean Model (HYCOM) which differ significantly in their basic formulations and grid. Results are presented for the climatological means over the satellite era (1980-2004) taken from transient simulations starting from the preindustrial (1850) driven by estimates of appropriate forcings over the 20th Century. Differences in base climate and variability related to the choice of ocean model are large, indicating an important structural uncertainty. The impact of interactive atmospheric composition on the climatology is relatively small except in regions such as the lower stratosphere, where ozone plays an important role, and the tropics, where aerosol changes affect the hydrological cycle and cloud cover. While key improvements over previous versions of the model are evident, these are not uniform across all metrics.

ocean model↗

NASA NTRS2014

CMIP5 Historical Simulations (1850-2012) with GISS ModelE2

Observations of climate change during the CMIP5 extended historical period (1850-2012) are compared to trends simulated by six versions of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE2 Earth System Model. The six models are constructed from three versions of the ModelE2 atmospheric general circulation model, distinguished by their treatment of atmospheric composition and the aerosol indirect effect, combined with two ocean general circulation models, HYCOM and Russell. Forcings that perturb the model climate during the historical period are described. Five-member ensemble averages from each of the six versions of ModelE2 simulate trends of surface air temperature, atmospheric temperature, sea ice and ocean heat content that are in general agreement with observed trends, although simulated warming is slightly excessive within the past decade. Only simulations that include increasing concentrations of long-lived greenhouse gases match the warming observed during the twentieth century. Differences in twentieth-century warming among the six model versions can be attributed to differences in climate sensitivity, aerosol and ozone forcing, and heat uptake by the deep ocean. Coupled models with HYCOM export less heat to the deep ocean, associated with reduced surface warming in regions of deepwater formation, but greater warming elsewhere at high latitudes along with reduced sea ice. All ensembles show twentieth-century annular trends toward reduced surface pressure at southern high latitudes and a poleward shift of the midlatitude westerlies, consistent with observations.

ocean heat content↗