Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CLIMATE MODELING”

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.

At least 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Climate Model Output Rewriter

The Climate Model Output Rewriter (CMOR) software was first developed by LLNL’s PCMDI program in early 2000s and was formally released with v1.0 (July 2006), v2.0 (January 2011), and v3.1(June 2016). CMOR is used to produce Climate and Forecast Convention (http://cfconventions.org/) CF-compliant netCDF files, in the standard format required to satisfy the World Climate Research Program (WCRP) Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). The software has been used across multiple phases of the Earth System Modeling (ESM) project CMIP (CMIP3, CMIP5, CMIP6, and planned use in CMIP7) along with numerous parallel projects focused on preparation observations for use in model evaluation (obs4MIPs) and forcing datasets (input4MIPs) to guide ESM simulations to meet strict experimental protocols. More information can be obtained from the CMOR website and code repositories: https://cmor.llnl.gov/; https://github.com/pcmdi/cmor; https://github.com/PCMDI/cmor3_documentation The ESM variable definitions used as input for CMOR can also be viewed in code repositories: https://github.com/PCMDI/cmip3-cmor-tables/; https://github.com/PCMDI/cmip5-cmor-tables/; https://github.com/PCMDI/cmip6-cmor-tables/

Mauzey, ChristopherF↗
DOE OSTI2016

Accelerated Climate Modeling for Energy (ACME) – Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Climate Research Facility – Atmospheric System Research (ASR) Coordination Workshop, October 21–22, 2015

The Climate and Environmental Sciences Division (CESD) of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Biological and Environmental Research focuses on advancing a robust predictive understanding of Earth’s climate and environmental systems to inform the development of sustainable solutions to the Nation’s energy and environmental challenges. CESD climate activities related to atmospheric processes include: observations through the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Climate Research Facility; atmospheric research and model parameterization development through the Atmospheric System Research (ASR) program; climate model development and climate research through the Accelerated Climate Modeling for Energy (ACME) project along with other computationally focused model-development activities within the CESD Earth System Modeling (ESM) program, and development of robust model analytical and testing frameworks at multiple scales through the Regional and Global Climate Modeling program. This workshop focused primarily on improving model treatment of atmospheric processes as a means to focus discussion and did not address research on terrestrial ecosystem and subsurface processes, which are also part of the CESD research portfolio.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Systematic Benchmarking of Climate Models: Methodologies, Applications, and New Directions

As climate models become increasingly complex, there is a growing need to comprehensively and systematically assess model performance with respect to observations. Given the increasing number and diversity of climate model simulations in use, the community has moved beyond simple model intercomparison and toward developing methods capable of benchmarking a large number of simulations against a suite of climate metrics. Here, we present a detailed review of evaluation and benchmarking methods and approaches developed in the last decade, focusing primarily on scientific implications for Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) simulations and CMIP6 results that contributed to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). Based on this review, we explain the resulting contemporary philosophy of model benchmarking, and provide clear distinctions and definitions of the terms model verification, process validation, evaluation, and benchmarking. While significant progress has been made in model development based on systematic evaluation and benchmarking efforts, some climate system biases still remain. The development of open‐source community software packages has played a fundamental role in identifying areas of significant model improvement and bias reduction. We review the key features of several software packages that have been commonly used over the past decade to evaluate and benchmark global and regional climate models. Additionally, we discuss best practices for the selection of evaluation and benchmarking metrics and for interpreting the obtained results, the importance of selecting suitable sources of reference data and accurate uncertainty quantification.

Environmental sciences↗
DOE OSTI2017

An aerosol activation metamodel of v1.2.0 of the pyrcel cloud parcel model: development and offline assessment for use in an aerosol–climate model

We describe an emulator of a detailed cloud parcel model which has been trained to assess droplet nucleation from a complex, multimodal aerosol size distribution simulated by a global aerosol–climate model. The emulator is constructed using a sensitivity analysis approach (polynomial chaos expansion) which reproduces the behavior of the targeted parcel model across the full range of aerosol properties and meteorology simulated by the parent climate model. An iterative technique using aerosol fields sampled from a global model is used to identify the critical aerosol size distribution parameters necessary for accurately predicting activation. Across the large parameter space used to train them, the emulators estimate cloud droplet number concentration (CDNC) with a mean relative error of 9.2% for aerosol populations without giant cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) and 6.9% when including them. Versus a parcel model driven by those same aerosol fields, the best-performing emulator has a mean relative error of 4.6%, which is comparable with two commonly used activation schemes also evaluated here (which have mean relative errors of 2.9 and 6.7%, respectively). We identify the potential for regional biases in modeled CDNC, particularly in oceanic regimes, where our best-performing emulator tends to overpredict by 7%, whereas the reference activation schemes range in mean relative error from -3 to 7%. The emulators which include the effects of giant CCN are more accurate in continental regimes (mean relative error of 0.3%) but strongly overestimate CDNC in oceanic regimes by up to 22%, particularly in the Southern Ocean. Finally, the biases in CDNC resulting from the subjective choice of activation scheme could potentially influence the magnitude of the indirect effect diagnosed from the model incorporating it.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Nudging allows direct evaluation of coupled climate models with in situ observations: a case study from the MOSAiC expedition

Comparing the output of general circulation models to observations is essential for assessing and improving the quality of models. While numerical weather prediction models are routinely assessed against a large array of observations, comparing climate models and observations usually requires long time series to build robust statistics. Here, we show that by nudging the large-scale atmospheric circulation in coupled climate models, model output can be compared to local observations for individual days. We illustrate this for three climate models during a period in April 2020 when a warm air intrusion reached the MOSAiC (Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate) expedition in the central Arctic. Radiosondes, cloud remote sensing and surface flux observations from the MOSAiC expedition serve as reference observations. The climate models AWI-CM1/ECHAM and AWI-CM3/IFS miss the diurnal cycle of surface temperature in spring, likely because both models assume the snowpack on ice to have a uniform temperature. CAM6, a model that uses three layers to represent snow temperature, represents the diurnal cycle more realistically. During a cold and dry period with pervasive thin mixed-phase clouds, AWI-CM1/ECHAM only produces partial cloud cover and overestimates downwelling shortwave radiation at the surface. AWI-CM3/IFS produces a closed cloud cover but misses cloud liquid water. Our results show that nudging the large-scale circulation to the observed state allows a meaningful comparison of climate model output even to short-term observational campaigns. We suggest that nudging can simplify and accelerate the pathway from observations to climate model improvements and substantially extends the range of observations suitable for model evaluation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Identifying the sources of uncertainty in climate model simulations of solar radiation modification with the G6sulfur and G6solar Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) simulations

We present here results from the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) simulations for the experiments G6sulfur and G6solar for six Earth system models participating in the Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) Phase 6. The aim of the experiments is to reduce the warming that results from a high-tier emission scenario (Shared Socioeconomic Pathways SSP5-8.5) to that resulting from a medium-tier emission scenario (SSP2-4.5). These simulations aim to analyze the response of climate models to a reduction in incoming surface radiation as a means to reduce global surface temperatures, and they do so either by simulating a stratospheric sulfate aerosol layer or, in a more idealized way, through a uniform reduction in the solar constant in the model. We find that over the final two decades of this century there are considerable inter-model spreads in the needed injection amounts of sulfate (29 ± 9 Tg-SO 2 /yr between 2081 and 2100), in the latitudinal distribution of the aerosol cloud and in the stratospheric temperature changes resulting from the added aerosol layer. Even in the simpler G6solar experiment, there is a spread in the needed solar dimming to achieve the same global temperature target (1.91 ± 0.44 %). The analyzed models already show significant differences in the response to the increasing CO 2 concentrations for global mean temperatures and global mean precipitation (2.05 K ± 0.42 K and 2.28 ± 0.80 %, respectively, for SSP5-8.5 minus SSP2-4.5 averaged over 2081–2100). With aerosol injection, the differences in how the aerosols spread further change some of the underlying uncertainties, such as the global mean precipitation response (–3.79 ± 0.76 % for G6sulfur compared to –2.07 ± 0.40 % for G6solar against SSP2-4.5 between 2081 and 2100). These differences in the behavior of the aerosols also result in a larger uncertainty in the regional surface temperature response among models in the case of the G6sulfur simulations, suggesting the need to devise various, more specific experiments to single out and resolve particular sources of uncertainty. The spread in the modeled response suggests that a degree of caution is necessary when using these results for assessing specific impacts of geoengineering in various aspects of the Earth system. However, all models agree that compared to a scenario with unmitigated warming, stratospheric aerosol geoengineering has the potential to both globally and locally reduce the increase in surface temperatures.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2024

Evaluation of Global Climate Models for Use in Energy Analysis

The interplay between energy, climate, and weather is becoming more complex due to increasing contributions of renewable energy generation, energy storage, electrified end uses, and the increasing frequency of extreme weather events. Energy system analyses commonly rely on meteorological inputs to estimate renewable energy generation and energy demand; however, these inputs rarely represent the estimated impacts of future climate change. Climate models and publicly available climate change datasets can be used for this purpose, but the selection of inputs from the myriad of available models and datasets is a nuanced and subjective process. In this work, we assess datasets from various global climate models (GCMs) from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We present evaluations of their skills with respect to the historical climate and comparisons of their future projections of climate change for two climate change scenarios. We present the results for different climatic and energy system regions and include interactive figures in the accompanying software repository. Previous work has presented similar GCM evaluations, but none have presented variables and metrics specifically intended for comprehensive energy systems analysis including impacts on energy demand, thermal cooling, hydropower, water availability, solar energy generation, and wind energy generation. We focus on GCM output meteorological variables that directly affect these energy system components including the representation of extreme values that can drive grid resilience events. The objective of this work is not to recommend the best climate model and dataset for a given analysis, but instead to provide a reference to facilitate the selection of climate models and scenarios in subsequent work.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Overcoming the disconnect between energy system and climate modeling

Energy system models underpin decisions by energy system planners and operators. Energy system modeling faces a transformation: accounting for changing meteorological conditions imposed by climate change. To enable that transformation, a community of practice in energy-climate modeling has started to form that aims to better integrate energy system models with weather and climate models. In this work, we evaluate the disconnects between the energy system and climate modeling communities, then lay out a research agenda to bridge those disconnects. In the near-term, we propose interdisciplinary activities for expediting uptake of future climate data in energy system modeling. In the long-term, we propose a transdisciplinary approach to enable development of (1) energy-system-tailored climate datasets for historical and future meteorological conditions and (2) energy system models that can effectively leverage those datasets. This agenda increases the odds of meeting ambitious climate mitigation goals by systematically capturing and mitigating climate risk in energy sector decision-making.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2017

pyhector: A Python interface for the simple climate model Hector

Here, pyhector is a Python interface for the simple climate model Hector (Hartin et al. 2015) developed in C++. Simple climate models like Hector can, for instance, be used in the analysis of scenarios within integrated assessment models like GCAM1, in the emulation of complex climate models, and in uncertainty analyses. Hector is an open-source, object oriented, simple global climate carbon cycle model. Its carbon cycle consists of a one pool atmosphere, three terrestrial pools which can be broken down into finer biomes or regions, and four carbon pools in the ocean component. The terrestrial carbon cycle includes primary production and respiration fluxes. The ocean carbon cycle circulates carbon via a simplified thermohaline circulation, calculating air-sea fluxes as well as the marine carbonate system. The model input is time series of greenhouse gas emissions; as example scenarios for these the Pyhector package contains the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs)2.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

The GFDL Variable-Resolution Global Chemistry-Climate Model for Research at the Nexus of US Climate and Air Quality Extremes

We present a variable-resolution global chemistry-climate model (AM4VR) developed at NOAA's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) for research at the nexus of US climate and air quality extremes. AM4VR has a horizontal resolution of 13 km over the US, allowing it to resolve urban-to-rural chemical regimes, mesoscale convective systems, and land-surface heterogeneity. With the resolution gradually reducing to 100 km over the Indian Ocean, we achieve multi-decadal simulations driven by observed sea surface temperatures at 50% of the computational cost for a 25-km uniform-resolution grid. In contrast with GFDL's AM4.1 contributing to the sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project at 100 km resolution, AM4VR features much improved US climate mean patterns and variability. In particular, AM4VR shows improved representation of: precipitation seasonal-to-diurnal cycles and extremes, notably reducing the central US dry-and-warm bias; western US snowpack and summer drought, with implications for wildfires; and the North American monsoon, affecting dust storms. AM4VR exhibits excellent representation of winter precipitation, summer drought, and air pollution meteorology in California with complex terrain, enabling skillful prediction of both extreme summer ozone pollution and winter haze events in the Central Valley. AM4VR also provides vast improvements in the process-level representations of biogenic volatile organic compound emissions, interactive dust emissions from land, and removal of air pollutants by terrestrial ecosystems. We highlight the value of increased model resolution in representing climate–air quality interactions through land-biosphere feedbacks. AM4VR offers a novel opportunity to study global dimensions to US air quality, especially the role of Earth system feedbacks in a changing climate.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Pushing the frontiers in climate modelling and analysis with machine learning

Climate modelling and analysis are facing new demands to enhance projections and climate information. Here, in this study, we argue that now is the time to push the frontiers of machine learning beyond state-of-the-art approaches, not only by developing machine-learning-based Earth system models with greater fidelity, but also by providing new capabilities through emulators for extreme event projections with large ensembles, enhanced detection and attribution methods for extreme events, and advanced climate model analysis and benchmarking. Utilizing this potential requires key machine learning challenges to be addressed, in particular generalization, uncertainty quantification, explainable artificial intelligence and causality. This interdisciplinary effort requires bringing together machine learning and climate scientists, while also leveraging the private sector, to accelerate progress towards actionable climate science.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

A comparison of model validation approaches for echo state networks using climate model replicates

As global temperatures continue to rise, climate mitigation strategies such as stratospheric aerosol injections (SAI) are increasingly discussed, but the downstream effects of these strategies are not well understood. As such, there is interest in developing statistical methods to quantify the evolution of climate variable relationships during the time period surrounding an SAI. Feature importance applied to echo state network (ESN) models has been proposed as a way to understand the effects of SAI using a data-driven model. This approach depends on the ESN fitting the data well. If not, the feature importance may place importance on features that are not representative of the underlying relationships. Typically, time series prediction models such as ESNs are assessed using out-of-sample performance metrics that divide the times series into separate training and testing sets. However, this model assessment approach is geared towards forecasting applications and not scenarios such as the motivating SAI example where the objective is using a data driven model to capture variable relationships. Here, in this paper, we demonstrate a novel use of climate model replicates to investigate the applicability of the commonly used repeated hold-out model assessment approach for the SAI application. Simulations of an SAI are generated using a simplified climate model, and different initialization conditions are used to provide independent training and testing sets containing the same SAI event. The climate model replicates enable out-of-sample measures of model performance, which are compared to the single time series hold-out validation approach. For our case study, it is found that the repeated hold-out sample performance is comparable, but conservative, to the replicate out-of-sample performance when the training set contains enough time after the aerosol injection.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

“Which Projections Do I Use?” Strategies for Climate Model Ensemble Subset Selection Based on Regional Stakeholder Needs

Climate model (or earth system model) projections are increasingly used for climate adaptation planning and impact assessments. As part of this process, many end‐users evaluate a subset of downscaled climate projections without being aware of the implications of downscaling methodology for statistics or event outcomes. Approaches for determining a subset of global climate models to use often focus on values from the raw models, rather than from their downscaled counterparts, in other words assuming that the statistical distribution of the multi‐model ensemble does not change post downscaling. This study demonstrates that a downscaled ensemble will typically retain the change distribution as a raw ensemble, but individual models can differ dramatically post‐downscaling. We recommend that subset‐selection methods account for this possibility and that decision‐relevant downscaled climate projections provide proper descriptions of fitness‐for‐purpose and essential caveats, so that non‐specialists can interpret the results with an appropriate level of confidence.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

The GFDL‐CM4X Climate Model Hierarchy, Part I: Model Description and Thermal Properties

We present the GFDL‐CM4X (Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Climate Model version 4X) coupled climate model hierarchy. The primary application for CM4X is to investigate ocean and sea ice physics as part of a realistic coupled Earth climate model. CM4X utilizes an updated MOM6 (Modular Ocean Model version 6) ocean physics package relative to CM4.0, and there are two members of the hierarchy: one that uses a horizontal grid spacing of 0.25° (referred to as CM4X‐p25) and the other that uses a grid 0.125° (CM4X‐p125). CM4X also refines its atmospheric grid from the nominally 100 km (cubed sphere C96) of CM4.0–50 km (C192). Finally, CM4X simplifies the land model to allow for a more focused study of the role of ocean changes to global mean climate. CM4X‐p125 reaches a global ocean area mean heat flux imbalance of -0.02 W m -2 within $\mathcal{O}$ (150) years in a pre‐industrial simulation, and retains that thermally equilibrated state over the subsequent centuries. This 1850 thermal equilibrium is characterized by roughly 400 ZJ less ocean heat than present‐day, which corresponds to estimates for anthropogenic ocean heat uptake between 1870 and present‐day. CM4X‐p25 approaches its thermal equilibrium only after more than 1000 years, at which time its ocean has roughly 1100 ZJ more heat than its early 21st century ocean initial state. Furthermore, the root‐mean‐square sea surface temperature bias for historical simulations is roughly 20% smaller in CM4X‐p125 relative to CM4X‐p25 (and CM4.0). We offer the mesoscale dominance hypothesis for why CM4X‐p125 shows such favorable thermal equilibration properties.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2018

Global-scale multidecadal variability missing in state-of-the-art climate models

Reliability of future global warming projections depends on how well climate models reproduce the observed climate change over the twentieth century. In this regard, deviations of the model-simulated climate change from observations, such as a recent “pause” in global warming, have received considerable attention. Such decadal mismatches between model-simulated and observed climate trends are common throughout the twentieth century, and their causes are still poorly understood. Here we show that the discrepancies between the observed and simulated climate variability on decadal and longer timescale have a coherent structure suggestive of a pronounced Global Multidecadal Oscillation. Surface temperature anomalies associated with this variability originate in the North Atlantic and spread out to the Pacific and Southern oceans and Antarctica, with Arctic following suit in about 25–35 years. While climate models exhibit various levels of decadal climate variability and some regional similarities to observations, none of the model simulations considered match the observed signal in terms of its magnitude, spatial patterns and their sequential time development. These results highlight a substantial degree of uncertainty in our interpretation of the observed climate change using current generation of climate models.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

The Importance of Weather and Climate to Energy Systems: A Workshop on Next Generation Challenges in Energy–Climate Modeling

More than 80 international participants, representing weather, climate, and energy systems research, joined two 4-hour remote sessions to highlight and prioritize ongoing and future challenges in energy-climate modelling. The workshop had two primary goals: to build a deeper engagement across the “energy” and “climate” research communities, and to identify and begin to address the scientific challenges associated with modelling climate risk in energy systems.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Evaluation of simulations of near-surface variables using the regional climate model CCLM for the MOSAiC winter period

The ship-based experiment MOSAiC 2019/2020 was carried out during a full year in the Arctic and yielded an excellent data set to test the parameterizations of ocean/sea-ice/atmosphere interaction processes in regional climate models (RCMs). In the present paper, near-surface data during MOSAiC are used for the verification of the RCM COnsortium for Small-scale MOdel–Climate Limited area Mode (COSMO-CLM or CCLM). CCLM is used in a forecast mode (nested in ERA5) for the whole Arctic with 15 km resolution and is run with different configurations of sea ice data. These include the standard sea ice concentration taken from passive microwave data with around 6 km resolution, sea ice concentration from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) thermal infrared data and MODIS sea ice lead fraction data for the winter period. CCLM simulations show a good agreement with the measurements. Relatively large negative biases for temperature occur for November and December, which are likely associated with a too large ice thickness used by CCLM. The consideration of sea ice leads in the sub-grid parameterization in CCLM yields improved results for the near-surface temperature. ERA5 data show a large warm bias of about 2.5°C and an underestimation of the temperature variability.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗