Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Arctic amplification”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

35 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2021

Elevation Dependent Warming in the Eastern Siberian Arctic

There is evidence for elevation-dependent warming (EDW) in many mountainous regions, including the Alps, Rockies, and Tibetan Plateau, all of which are in mid-latitudes. Most studies finding evidence of EDW indicate that both recent decadal and future projected warming rates are greater at higher elevations. In this study, we examine the roles of Arctic amplification and elevation on future warming rates in winter and summer in eastern Siberia (50-70°N; 80-180°E). This region includes four major river basins that flow into the Arctic Ocean (the Yenisei, Lena, Indigirka, and Kolyma) and intersects with mountain ranges in northern Mongolia and eastern Siberia. We analyse projected 21st century temperature projections using a six-member ensemble of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Community Climate System Model (CCSM4) with a radiative forcing of 8.5 W m-2. Projected warming rates in winter for the 21st century are dominated by Arctic amplification, which leads to significantly larger warming rates at higher latitudes, with latitudinal gradients of about 0.16°C per degree latitude. In summer, the latitudinal gradient is near zero (0.02°C per degree of latitude). Within specific latitude bands, we also find EDW. However, unlike most mid-latitude locations where warming rates are greater at higher elevations, we find that future warming rates are smaller at higher elevations for this high-latitude region, particularly during winter, with statistically significant rates varying between -0.70 and -2.46 °C/km for different 5° latitude bands. The decrease in warming rates with elevation in winter at the highest latitudes is primarily attributed to strong inversions and changes in the lapse rate as free-air temperatures warm at slower rates than surface temperatures. In summer, the elevation dependence is much weaker than in winter but still statistically significant and negative in all but the most northern latitude band with values ranging between -0.10 and -0.56 °C/km.

elevation-dependent warming (EDW)↗
NASA NTRS2019

Evidence of Strong Contributions from Mixed-Phase Clouds to Arctic Climate Change

Underestimation of the proportion of supercooled liquid in mixed‐phase clouds in climate models has called into question its impact on Arctic climate change. We show that correcting for this bias in the CESM model can either enhance or reduce Arctic amplification depending on the microphysical characteristics of the clouds as a corollary to the cloud phase feedback. Replacement of ice with liquid in the cloud phase feedback results in more downward longwave radiation, which is effectively trapped as heat at the surface in the Arctic due to its unique stable stratification conditions, and this ultimately leads to a more positive lapse rate feedback. The larger the ice particles are to begin with, the stronger Arctic amplification becomes due to the lower precipitation efficiency of liquid droplets compared to ice crystals. Our results emphasize the importance of realistic representations of microphysical processes in mixed‐phase clouds, particularly in the Arctic.

Arctic↗
NASA NTRS2023

Arctic Warming in Response to Regional Aerosol Emissions Reductions

This study examines the Arctic surface air temperature response to regional aerosol emissions reductions using three fully coupled chemistry–climate models: National Center for Atmospheric Research-Community Earth System Model version 1, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory-Coupled Climate Model version 3 (GFDL-CM3) and Goddard Institute for Space Studies-ModelE version 2. Each of these models was used to perform a series of aerosol perturbation experiments, in which emissions of different aerosol types (sulfate, black carbon (BC), and organic carbon) in different northern mid-latitude source regions, and of biomass burning aerosol over South America and Africa, were substantially reduced or eliminated. We find that the Arctic warms in nearly every experiment, the only exceptions being the U.S. and Europe BC experiments in GFDL-CM3 in which there is a weak and insignificant cooling. The Arctic warming is generally larger than the global mean warming (i.e. Arctic amplification occurs), particularly during non-summer months. The models agree that changes in the poleward atmospheric moisture transport are the most important factor explaining the spread in Arctic warming across experiments: the largest warming tends to coincide with the largest increases in moisture transport into the Arctic. In contrast, there is an inconsistent relationship (correlation) across experiments between the local radiative forcing over the Arctic and the simulated Arctic warming, with this relationship being positive in one model (GFDL-CM3) and negative in the other two. Our results thus highlight the prominent role of poleward energy transport in driving Arctic warming and amplification, and suggest that the relative importance of poleward energy transport and local forcing/feedbacks is likely to be model dependent.

Arctic↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-29139-DND

The Arctic has been warming at a rate outpacing globally-averaged warming by 2-3 times, a phenomenon known as "Arctic Amplification" (AA). AA is evident in observations of Arctic surface temperature over the last century as well as in model predictions. The accuracy of model predictions is crucial to determine our response to climate change, as Arctic changes have consequences for the atmospheric circulation, sea level rise, and the carbon cycle. Unfortunately, models show a wide range of possible futures and intermodel spread in projections of Arctic temperature is larger than for any other region: a 2°C global temperature increase- the limit set by the Paris Climate Agreement- would lead to an Arctic temperature change between 3-7°C according to Coupled Model Intercomparison 5 (CMIP5) models. This intermodel spread represents a key deficiency in the understanding of Arctic feedback processes and how changes in various physical parameters (e.g. sea ice cover, clouds, heat transport and surface fluxes) affect the temperature response. Using a process-oriented decomposition of the simulate Arctic surface energy budget, we attribute the largest contribution to the CMIP5 intermodel spead in projected Arctic warming to the Barents-Kara Sea region. Our results reveal that the increasing seasonal fluxing of ocean heat content is a significant part of the intermodel spread in AA and relates strongly to change in surface turbulent fluxes. Our results indicate that if we are to significantly reduce the intermodel spread in projected AA we must focus on understanding the behavior and physical processes that drive surface energy flows in the B-K sea region.

Patrick Taylor↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Arctic Radiation-Cloud-Aerosol-Surface Interaction eXperiment (ARCSIX)

The Arctic climate system is amidst a transition. Over the last 40 years, the Arctic sea ice pack has transformed from a predominantly thick, multi-year sea ice to a predominantly thin, seasonal sea ice, termed the “New Arctic”. The observed rapid changes in the Arctic sea ice pack are an integral part of the Arctic Amplification phenomenon and represent a response to and a feedback on global climate change. As a result, the role of the Arctic within the global climate system is changing. Substantial uncertainty exists in our understanding of the atmosphere-surface interactions within the Arctic system, limiting our knowledge of the Arctic’s role in the future climate. Advancing our understanding of the Arctic climate system requires (1) measurements of the coupling between radiative processes and sea ice surface properties during summer sea ice melt; (2) measurements of the processes controlling the predominant Arctic cloud regimes and their properties (Fig. 1); and (3) improvements in the ability to monitor Arctic cloud, radiation, and sea ice processes from space. A key challenge is that thin, low clouds that are radiatively important to the Arctic surface energy budget can go undetected (Fig. 1). The Arctic Radiation-Cloud-Aerosol-Surface-Interaction eXperiment (ARCSIX) is an airborne campaign based at the Pituffik Space Base in Greenland from May-August 2024 sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to address these needs. ARCSIX consists of two airborne measurement campaigns taking place in two 3-week intervals during the early and late sea ice melt season: late May through early June and late July through early August, respectively. ARCSIX science is guided by three broad science questions that encapsulate the key influences of radiation-cloud-aerosol-sea ice coupling and a remote sensing and modeling objective: Science Question 1 (Radiation): What is the impact of the predominant summer Arctic cloud types on the radiative surface energy budget? Science Question 2 (Cloud Life Cycle): What processes control the evolution and maintenance of the predominant cloud regimes in the summertime Arctic? Science Question 3 (Sea Ice): How do the two-way interactions between surface properties and atmospheric forcings affect the sea ice evolution? Remote Sensing and Modeling Objective: Enhance our long-term space-based monitoring and predictive capabilities of Arctic sea ice, clouds, and aerosols.

Patrick Taylor↗
NASA NTRS2018

The Influence of Prescribed Boundary Conditions on Near-Surface Temperature over the Arctic in the MERRA-2 Atmospheric Model

An accurate historical record of evolving Arctic conditions is integral to furthering our understanding of climate processes and to providing a foundation for predicting future climate scenarios in northern high latitudes. Atmospheric reanalyses are seen as an important source of information on the recent past for the data-sparse Arctic region. An assessment of near-surface Arctic air temperatures finds significant discrepancies among the various modern reanalyses. An important point is the treatment of surface boundary conditions: specifically, the sea ice cover and sea surface temperatures (SSTs) over the Arctic Ocean. Reanalyses use different methodologies and data sources for SSTs and sea ice concentration boundary forcing. Notably, the Modern Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, version 2 (MERRA-2) and the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Interim Re-Analysis (ERA-Interim) both use boundary forcing derived from the Operational Sea Surface Temperature and Sea Ice Analysis (OSTIA) over an extended, overlapping period of time. This allows for an examination of differences between the two systems while both concurrently employ the same fractional sea ice coverage. To further understand these differences, an ensemble of AMIP-style simulations using the MERRA-2 atmospheric model - but without data assimilation - shows considerable differences in Arctic temperatures as compared to reanalyses, particularly in autumn and winter months. Results from the AMIP simulations suggest that the surface representation over sea ice used in the MERRA-2 model provides an intrinsic warm bias and obfuscates Arctic Amplification, an established feature present in observations and reanalyses. An additional ensemble of AMIP-style simulations using the MERRA-2 atmospheric model was performed using boundary conditions derived from the ERA-Interim reanalysis. An in-depth comparison of surface temperatures over the Arctic from the two reanalyses and two AMIP-style ensembles will be presented, along with an assessment of the effects of the varying Arctic temperature time series on the atmospheric general circulation and energy budget.

Collow, Allison B. Marquardt↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-31980-DND

Background and Objective: The surface temperature of the Arctic is projected to warm more than any other region on Earth (i.e., Arctic Amplification). Even though the increase of solar absorption, due to the reduction of the surface albedo associated with the loss of sea ice, is strongest in summer, the warming is largest in late fall/early winter and smallest in summer. The most common theory put forward to explain the suppressed summer warming is that most of the additional solar energy goes into the melting of sea ice. The energy gain in summer, however, is thought to lead to the Arctic warming maximum in late fall/early winter by leading to enhanced heat release during this time period as a result of the enhanced surface latent and sensible heat fluxes into the atmosphere, also a consequence of the loss and thinning of sea-ice, warming the surface air temperature. While this commonly accepted theory makes clear the importance of sea-ice loss on Arctic warming, by focusing on surface skin temperature our study proposes a differing perspective on how sea-ice decline amplifies Arctic warming and establishes its seasonal pattern.

Sergio A. Sejas↗
NASA NTRS2022

The Future Intensification of the North Atlantic Winter Storm Track: The Key Role of Dynamic Ocean Coupling

Climate models project an intensification of the wintertime North Atlantic storm track, over its downstream region, by the end of this century. Previous studies have suggested that ocean-atmosphere coupling plays a key role in this intensification, but the precise role of the different components of the coupling has not been explored and quantified. In this paper, using a hierarchy of ocean coupling experiments, we isolate and quantify the respective roles of thermodynamic (changes in surface heat fluxes) and dynamic (changes in ocean heat flux convergence) ocean coupling in the projected intensification of North Atlantic transient eddy kinetic energy (TEKE). We show that dynamic coupling accounts for nearly all of the future TEKE strengthening as it overcomes the much smaller effect of surface heat flux changes to weaken the TEKE. We further show that by reducing the Arctic amplification in the North Atlantic, ocean heat flux convergence increases the meridional temperature gradient aloft, causing a larger eddy growth rate, and resulting in the strengthening of North Atlantic TEKE. Our results stress the importance of better monitoring and investigating the changes in ocean heat transport, for improving climate change adaptation strategies.

North Atlantic winter storms↗
NASA NTRS2020

Evaluation of Arctic Warming in Mid-Pliocene Climate Simulations

Palaeoclimate simulations improve our understanding of the climate, inform us about the performance of climate models in a different climate scenario, and help to identify robust features of the climate system. Here, we analyse Arctic warming in an ensemble of 16 simulations of the mid-Pliocene Warm Period (mPWP), derived from the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project Phase 2 (PlioMIP2). The PlioMIP2 ensemble simulates Arctic (60–90∘ N) annual mean surface air temperature (SAT) increases of 3.7 to 11.6 ∘C compared to the pre-industrial period, with a multi-model mean (MMM) increase of 7.2 ∘C. The Arctic warming amplification ratio relative to global SAT anomalies in the ensemble ranges from 1.8 to 3.1 (MMM is 2.3). Sea ice extent anomalies range from −3.0 to −10.4×106 km2, with a MMM anomaly of −5.6×106 km2, which constitutes a decrease of 53 % compared to the pre-industrial period. The majority (11 out of 16) of models simulate summer sea-ice-free conditions (≤1×106 km2) in their mPWP simulation. The ensemble tends to underestimate SAT in the Arctic when compared to available reconstructions, although the degree of underestimation varies strongly between the simulations. The simulations with the highest Arctic SAT anomalies tend to match the proxy dataset in its current form better. The ensemble shows some agreement with reconstructions of sea ice, particularly with regard to seasonal sea ice. Large uncertainties limit the confidence that can be placed in the findings and the compatibility of the different proxy datasets. We show that while reducing uncertainties in the reconstructions could decrease the SAT data–model discord substantially, further improvements are likely to be found in enhanced boundary conditions or model physics. Lastly, we compare the Arctic warming in the mPWP to projections of future Arctic warming and find that the PlioMIP2 ensemble simulates greater Arctic amplification than CMIP5 future climate simulations and an increase instead of a decrease in Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) strength compared to pre-industrial period. The results highlight the importance of slow feedbacks in equilibrium climate simulations, and that caution must be taken when using simulations of the mPWP as an analogue for future climate change.

Palaeoclimate simulations↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison of Observed Longwave, Shortwave Irradiance and Surface Temperature from “MOSAiC” to CERES Radiative Transfer Calculations and Inputs

As atmospheric temperatures rise due to increased anthropogenic forcing, the effect is expected to be larger over the arctic than midlatitude and tropics, known as polar amplification. A multi-national program, the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) was ran between Sept 2019 and Oct 2020. The project deployed scientific instruments on board the German research vessel Polarstern with the ship remaining across a year to observe all aspects of polar climate. The US DOE deployed the ARM AMF2 aboard the ship along with several off-ship sites for extended spatial observations. Of particular importance was the measurement of the energetics of the ice/ocean/atmosphere interactions through observations of surface irradiance and surface temperatures. NASA’s Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) project produces the SYN1deg Edition 4 data product. This product provides high quality, hourly, globally gridded and temporally complete maps of top of atmosphere (TOA), in atmosphere, and surface irradiances. TOA fluxes are derived from CERES instruments and geostationary satellites. In addition, TOA, in atmosphere, and surface irradiances are computed using the Langley Fu and Liou radiative transfer model. The radiative transfer model is run hourly at 1 degree ~equal area spatial resolution. Meteorological profiles are provided by Global Modeling and Assimilation Office’s GEOS-541 reanalysis product. Cloud properties are derived solely from Terra and Aqua MODIS imagers northward of 60°. Here we compare SYN1deg hourly calculations of surface irradiance to observations from the AMF2 to validate the products estimates of surface irradiance in this challenging area. Along with the irradiance comparisons we take a close look at the surface temperature record in the GEOS-541 product and compare it over both time and space to several surface observations provided by MOSAiC. Along with the comparison to the re-analysis record we will compare these observed surface temperatures to those derived from the AIRS product, which is known to have some difficulty in extreme high latitude areas. The goals of this study are 1) understand computed surface downward irradiance and temperature error separated by surface type (e.g. sea ice or open water) and by season, and 2) error covariance in spatial and temporal space. We seek to use this information to extrapolate the error from the MOSAiC domain to a larger arctic region.

David A Rutan↗
NASA NTRS2014

Implications of Arctic Sea Ice Decline for the Earth System

Arctic sea ice decline has led to an amplification of surface warming and is projected to continue to decline from anthropogenic forcing, although the exact timing of ice-free summers is uncertain owing to large natural variability. Sea ice reductions affect surface heating patterns and the atmospheric pressure distribution, which may alter midlatitude extreme weather patterns. Increased light penetration and nutrient availability during spring from earlier ice breakup enhances primary production in the Arctic Ocean and its adjacent shelf seas. Ice-obligate marine mammals may be losers, whereas seasonally migrant species may be winners from rapid sea ice decline. Tundra greening is occurring across most of the Arctic, driven primarily by warming temperatures, and is displaying complex spatial patterns that are likely tied to other factors. Sea ice changes are affecting greenhouse gas exchanges as well as halogen chemistry in the Arctic. This review highlights the heterogeneous nature of Arctic change, which is vital for researchers to better understand.

Decline↗
NASA NTRS2015

The Influence of Sea Ice on Arctic Low Cloud Properties and Radiative Effects

The Arctic is one of the most climatically sensitive regions of the Earth. Climate models robustly project the Arctic to warm 2-3 times faster than the global mean surface temperature, termed polar warming amplification (PWA), but also display the widest range of surface temperature projections in this region. The response of the Arctic to increased CO2 modulates the response in tropical and extra-tropical regions through teleconnections in the atmospheric circulation. An increased frequency of extreme precipitation events in the northern mid-latitudes, for example, has been linked to the change in the background equator-to-pole temperature gradient implied by PWA. Understanding the Arctic climate system is therefore important for predicting global climate change. The ice albedo feedback is the primary mechanism driving PWA, however cloud and dynamical feedbacks significantly contribute. These feedback mechanisms, however, do not operate independently. How do clouds respond to variations in sea ice? This critical question is addressed by combining sea ice, cloud, and radiation observations from satellites, including CERES, CloudSAT, CALIPSO, MODIS, and microwave radiometers, to investigate sea ice-cloud interactions at the interannual timescale in the Arctic. Cloud characteristics are strongly tied to the atmospheric dynamic and thermodynamic state. Therefore, the sensitivity of Arctic cloud characteristics, vertical distribution and optical properties, to sea ice anomalies is computed within atmospheric dynamic and thermodynamic regimes. Results indicate that the cloud response to changes in sea ice concentration differs significantly between atmospheric state regimes. This suggests that (1) the atmospheric dynamic and thermodynamic characteristics and (2) the characteristics of the marginal ice zone are important for determining the seasonal forcing by cloud on sea ice variability.

Taylor, Patrick C.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Radiative Impacts of Further Arctic Sea Ice Melt: Using past Observations to Inform Future Climate Impacts

The Arctic region has seen dramatic changes over the past several decades, from polar amplification of global temperature rise to ecosystem changes to the decline of the sea ice. While there has been much speculation as to when the world will see an ice-free Arctic, the radiative impacts of an eventual disappearance of the Arctic sea ice are likely to be significant regardless of the timing. Using CERES radiation and microwave satellite sea ice data, Pistone et al (2014) estimated the radiative forcing due to albedo changes associated with the Arctic sea ice retreat over the 30 years of the satellite data record. In this study, we found that the Arctic Ocean saw a decrease in all-sky albedo of 4% (from 52% to 48%), for an estimated increase in solar heating of 6.4 W/m(exp 2) between 1979 and 2011, or 0.21 W/m(exp 2) when averaged over the globe. This value is substantial--approximately 25% as large as the forcing due to the change in CO2 during the same period. Here we update and expand upon this previous work and use the CERES broadband shortwave observations to explore the radiative impacts of a transition to completely ice-free Arctic Ocean. We estimate the annually-averaged Arctic Ocean planetary albedo under ice-free and cloud-free conditions to be 14% over the region, or approximately 25% lower in absolute terms than the Arctic Ocean cloud-free albedo in 1979. However, the question of all-sky conditions (i.e. including the effects of clouds) introduces a new level of complexity. We explore several cloud scenarios and the resultant impact on albedo. In each of these cases, the estimated forcing is not uniformly distributed throughout the year. We describe the relative contributions of ice loss by month as well as the spatial distributions of the resulting changes in absorbed solar energy. The seasonal timing and location—in addition to magnitude—of the altered solar absorption may have significant implications for atmospheric and ocean dynamics in the Arctic and at lower latitudes; this observationally-based estimate of the large-scale characteristics of an ice-free Arctic thus provides a valuable tool to complement and validate model-based assessments of future climate.

Pistone, K.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Projected Regime Shift in Arctic Cloud and Water Vapor Feedbacks

The Arctic climate is changing faster than any other large-scale region on Earth. A variety of positive feedback mechanisms are responsible for the amplification, most of which are linked with changes in snow and ice cover, surface temperature (T(sub s)), atmospheric water vapor (WV), and cloud properties. As greenhouse gases continue to accumulate in the atmosphere, air temperature and water vapor content also increase, leading to a warmer surface and ice loss, which further enhance evaporation and WV. Many details of these interrelated feedbacks are poorly understood, yet are essential for understanding the pace and regional variations in future Arctic change. We use a global climate model (Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Atmosphere-Ocean Model) to examine several components of these feedbacks, how they vary by season, and how they are projected to change through the 21st century. One positive feedback begins with an increase in T(sub s) that produces an increase in WV, which in turn increases the downward longwave flux (DLF) and T(sub s), leading to further evaporation. Another associates the expected increases in cloud cover and optical thickness with increasing DLF and T(sub s). We examine the sensitivities between DLF and other climate variables in these feedbacks and find that they are strongest in the non-summer seasons, leading to the largest amplification in Ts during these months. Later in the 21st century, however, DLF becomes less sensitive to changes in WV and cloud optical thickness, as they cause the atmosphere to emit longwave radiation more nearly as a black body. This regime shift in sensitivity implies that the amplified pace of Arctic change relative to the northern hemisphere could relax in the future.

Chen, Yonghua↗
NASA NTRS2004

Satellite Observed Changes in the Arctic

The Arctic is currently considered an area in transformation. Glaciers have been retreating, permafrost has been diminishing, snow covered areas have been decreasing, and sea ice and ice sheets have been thinning. This paper provides an overview of the unique role that satellite sensors have contributed in the detection of changes in the Arctic and demonstrates that many of the changes are not just local but a pan-Arctic phenomenon. Changes from the upper atmosphere to the surface are discussed and it is apparent that the magnitude of the trends tends to vary from region to region and from season to season. Previous reports of a warming Arctic and a retreating perennial ice cover have also been updated, and results show that changes are ongoing. Feedback effects that can lead to amplification of the signals and the role of satellite data in enhancing global circulation models are also discussed.

Comiso, Josefino C.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Northern Winter Climate Change: Assessment of Uncertainty in CMIP5 Projections Related to Stratosphere-Troposphere Coupling

Future changes in the stratospheric circulation could have an important impact on northern winter tropospheric climate change, given that sea level pressure (SLP) responds not only to tropospheric circulation variations but also to vertically coherent variations in troposphere-stratosphere circulation. Here we assess northern winter stratospheric change and its potential to influence surface climate change in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project-Phase 5 (CMIP5) multimodel ensemble. In the stratosphere at high latitudes, an easterly change in zonally averaged zonal wind is found for the majority of the CMIP5 models, under the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 scenario. Comparable results are also found in the 1% CO2 increase per year projections, indicating that the stratospheric easterly change is common feature in future climate projections. This stratospheric wind change, however, shows a significant spread among the models. By using linear regression, we quantify the impact of tropical upper troposphere warming, polar amplification, and the stratospheric wind change on SLP. We find that the intermodel spread in stratospheric wind change contributes substantially to the intermodel spread in Arctic SLP change. The role of the stratosphere in determining part of the spread in SLP change is supported by the fact that the SLP change lags the stratospheric zonally averaged wind change. Taken together, these findings provide further support for the importance of simulating the coupling between the stratosphere and the troposphere, to narrow the uncertainty in the future projection of tropospheric circulation changes.

climate change↗
NASA NTRS2021

The Impacts of Climate and Wildfire on Ecosystem Gross Primary Productivity in Alaska

The increase in wildfire occurrence and severity seen over the past decades in the boreal and Arctic biomes is expected to continue in the future in response to rapid climate change in this region. Recent studies documented positive trends in gross primary productivity (GPP) for Arctic boreal biomes driven by warming, but it is unclear how GPP trends are affected by wildfires. Here, we used satellite vegetation observations and environmental data with a diagnostic GPP model to analyze recovery from large fires in Alaska over the period 2000‐2019. We confirmed earlier findings that warmer‐than‐average years provide favorable climate conditions for vegetation growth, leading to a GPP increase of 1 Tg C/yr, contributed mainly from enhanced productivity in the early growing season. However, higher temperatures increase the risk of wildfire occurrence leading to direct carbon loss over a period of 1‐3 years. While mortality related to severe wildfires reduce ecosystem productivity, post‐fire productivity in moderately burned areas shows a significant positive trend. The rapid GPP recovery following fires reported here might be favorable for maintaining the region’s net carbon sink, but wildfires can indirectly promote the release of long‐term stored carbon in the permafrost. With the projected increase in severity and frequency of wildfires in the future, we expect a reduction of GPP and therefore amplification of climate warming in this region.

Nima Madani↗