SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Model intercomparison”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2012

Evaluation of Arctic Sea Ice Thickness Simulated by Arctic Ocean Model Intercomparison Project Models

Six Arctic Ocean Model Intercomparison Project model simulations are compared with estimates of sea ice thickness derived from pan-Arctic satellite freeboard measurements (2004-2008); airborne electromagnetic measurements (2001-2009); ice draft data from moored instruments in Fram Strait, the Greenland Sea, and the Beaufort Sea (1992-2008) and from submarines (1975-2000); and drill hole data from the Arctic basin, Laptev, and East Siberian marginal seas (1982-1986) and coastal stations (1998-2009). Despite an assessment of six models that differ in numerical methods, resolution, domain, forcing, and boundary conditions, the models generally overestimate the thickness of measured ice thinner than approximately 2 mand underestimate the thickness of ice measured thicker than about approximately 2m. In the regions of flat immobile landfast ice (shallow Siberian Seas with depths less than 25-30 m), the models generally overestimate both the total observed sea ice thickness and rates of September and October ice growth from observations by more than 4 times and more than one standard deviation, respectively. The models do not reproduce conditions of fast ice formation and growth. Instead, the modeled fast ice is replaced with pack ice which drifts, generating ridges of increasing ice thickness, in addition to thermodynamic ice growth. Considering all observational data sets, the better correlations and smaller differences from observations are from the Estimating the Circulation and Climate of the Ocean, Phase II and Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System models.

sea ice↗

NASA NTRS2021

Large-scale features of Last Interglacial climate: results from evaluating the lig127k simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6)–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4)

The modeling of paleoclimate, using physically based tools, is increasingly seen as a strong out-of-sample test of the models that are used for the projection of future climate changes. New to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) is the Tier 1 Last Interglacial experiment for 127 000 years ago (lig127k), designed to address the climate responses to stronger orbital forcing than the midHolocene experiment, using the same state-of-the-art models as for the future and following a common experimental protocol. Here we present a first analysis of a multi-model ensemble of 17 climate models, all of which have completed the CMIP6 DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima) experiments. The equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) of these models varies from 1.8 to 5.6°C. The seasonal character of the insolation anomalies results in strong summer warming over the Northern Hemisphere continents in the lig127k ensemble as compared to the CMIP6 piControl and much-reduced minimum sea ice in the Arctic. The multi-model results indicate enhanced summer monsoonal precipitation in the Northern Hemisphere and reductions in the Southern Hemisphere. These responses are greater in the lig127k than the CMIP6 midHolocene simulations as expected from the larger insolation anomalies at 127 than 6 ka. New synthesis for surface temperature and precipitation, targeted for 127 ka, have been developed for comparison to the multi-model ensemble. The lig127k model ensemble and data reconstructions are in good agreement for summer temperature anomalies over Canada, Scandinavia, and the North Atlantic and for precipitation over the Northern Hemisphere continents. The model–data comparisons and mismatches point to further study of the sensitivity of the simulations to uncertainties in the boundary conditions and of the uncertainties and sparse coverage in current proxy reconstructions. The CMIP6–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4) lig127k simulations, in combination with the proxy record, improve our confidence in future projections of monsoons, surface temperature, and Arctic sea ice, thus providing a key target for model evaluation and optimization.

Last Interglacial climate↗

NASA NTRS2023

The Emissions Model Intercomparison Project (Emissions-MIP): Quantifying Model Sensitivity to Emission Characteristics

Anthropogenic emissions of aerosols and precursor compounds are known to significantly affect the energy balance of the Earth–atmosphere system, alter the formation of clouds and precipitation, and have a substantial impact on human health and the environment. Global models are an essential tool for examining the impacts of these emissions. In this study, we examine the sensitivity of model results to the assumed height of SO 2 injection, seasonality of SO 2 and black carbon (BC) particulate emissions, and the assumed fraction of SO 2 emissions that is injected into the atmosphere as particulate phase sulfate (SO 4 ) in 11 climate and chemistry models, including both chemical transport models and the atmospheric component of Earth system models. We find large variation in atmospheric lifetime across models for SO 2 , SO 4 , and BC, with a particularly large relative variation for SO 2 , which indicates that fundamental aspects of atmospheric sulfur chemistry remain uncertain. Of the perturbations examined in this study, the assumed height of SO 2 injection had the largest overall impacts, particularly on global mean net radiative flux (maximum difference of −0.35 W m −2 ), SO 2 lifetime over Northern Hemisphere land (maximum difference of 0.8 d), surface SO 2 concentration (up to 59 % decrease), and surface sulfate concentration (up to 23 % increase). Emitting SO 2 at height consistently increased SO 2 and SO 4 column burdens and shortwave cooling, with varying magnitudes, but had inconsistent effects across models on the sign of the change in implied cloud forcing. The assumed SO 4 emission fraction also had a significant impact on net radiative flux and surface sulfate concentration. Because these properties are not standardized across models this is a source of inter-model diversity typically neglected in model intercomparisons. These results imply a need to ensure that anthropogenic emission injection height and SO 4 emission fraction are accurately and consistently represented in global models.

Emissions Model Intercomparison Project↗

NASA NTRS2017

Biogeochemical Protocols and Diagnostics for the CMIP6 Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP)

The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) focuses on the physics and biogeochemistry of the ocean component of Earth system models participating in the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). OMIP aims to provide standard protocols and diagnostics for ocean models, while offering a forum to promote their common assessment and improvement. It also offers to compare solutions of the same ocean models when forced with reanalysis data (OMIP simulations) vs. when integrated within fully coupled Earth system models (CMIP6). Here we detail simulation protocols and diagnostics for OMIP's biogeochemical and inert chemical tracers. These passive-tracer simulations will be coupled to ocean circulation models, initialized with observational data or output from a model spin-up, and forced by repeating the 1948-2009 surface fluxes of heat, fresh water, and momentum. These so-called OMIP-BGC simulations include three inert chemical tracers (CFC-11, CFC-12, SF [subscript] 6) and biogeochemical tracers (e.g., dissolved inorganic carbon, carbon isotopes, alkalinity, nutrients, and oxygen). Modelers will use their preferred prognostic BGC model but should follow common guidelines for gas exchange and carbonate chemistry. Simulations include both natural and total carbon tracers. The required forced simulation (omip1) will be initialized with gridded observational climatologies. An optional forced simulation (omip1-spunup) will be initialized instead with BGC fields from a long model spin-up, preferably for 2000 years or more, and forced by repeating the same 62-year meteorological forcing. That optional run will also include abiotic tracers of total dissolved inorganic carbon and radiocarbon, CTabio and 14CTabio, to assess deep-ocean ventilation and distinguish the role of physics vs. biology. These simulations will be forced by observed atmospheric histories of the three inert gases and CO2 as well as carbon isotope ratios of CO2. OMIP-BGC simulation protocols are founded on those from previous phases of the Ocean Carbon-Cycle Model Intercomparison Project. They have been merged and updated to reflect improvements concerning gas exchange, carbonate chemistry, and new data for initial conditions and atmospheric gas histories. Code is provided to facilitate their implementation.

Carbon↗

NASA NTRS2015

ISMIP6: Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6

ISMIP6 (Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6) targets the Cryosphere in a Changing Climate and the Future Sea Level Grand Challenges of the WCRP (World Climate Research Program). Primary goal is to provide future sea level contribution from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, along with associated uncertainty. Secondary goal is to investigate feedback due to dynamic ice sheet models. Experiment design uses and augment the existing CMIP6 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6) DECK (Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Characterization of Klima) experiments. Additonal MIP (Model Intercomparison Project)- specific experiments will be designed for ISM (Ice Sheet Model). Effort builds on the Ice2sea, SeaRISE (Sea-level Response to Ice Sheet Evolution) and COMBINE (Comprehensive Modelling of the Earth System for Better Climate Prediction and Projection) efforts.

CMIP6↗

NASA NTRS2021

Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6

The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) defines and coordinates the main set of future climate projections, based on concentration-driven simulations, within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6). This paper presents a range of its outcomes by synthesizing results from the participating global coupled Earth system models. We limit our scope to the analysis of strictly geophysical outcomes: mainly global averages and spatial patterns of change for surface air temperature and precipitation. We also compare CMIP6 projections to CMIP5 results, especially for those scenarios that were designed to provide continuity across the CMIP phases, at the same time highlighting important differences in forcing composition, as well as in results. The range of future temperature and precipitation changes by the end of the century (2081–2100) encompassing the Tier 1 experiments based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5) and SSP1-1.9 spans a larger range of outcomes compared to CMIP5, due to higher warming (by close to 1.5 °C) reached at the upper end of the 5 %–95 % envelope of the highest scenario (SSP5-8.5). This is due to both the wider range of radiative forcing that the new scenarios cover and the higher climate sensitivities in some of the new models compared to their CMIP5 predecessors. Spatial patterns of change for temperature and precipitation averaged over models and scenarios have familiar features, and an analysis of their variations confirms model structural differences to be the dominant source of uncertainty. Models also differ with respect to the size and evolution of internal variability as measured by individual models' initial condition ensemble spreads, according to a set of initial condition ensemble simulations available under SSP3-7.0. These experiments suggest a tendency for internal variability to decrease along the course of the century in this scenario, a result that will benefit from further analysis over a larger set of models. Benefits of mitigation, all else being equal in terms of societal drivers, appear clearly when comparing scenarios developed under the same SSP but to which different degrees of mitigation have been applied. It is also found that a mild overshoot in temperature of a few decades around mid-century, as represented in SSP5-3.4OS, does not affect the end outcome of temperature and precipitation changes by 2100, which return to the same levels as those reached by the gradually increasing SSP4-3.4 (not erasing the possibility, however, that other aspects of the system may not be as easily reversible). Central estimates of the time at which the ensemble means of the different scenarios reach a given warming level might be biased by the inclusion of models that have shown faster warming in the historical period than the observed. Those estimates show all scenarios reaching 1.5 °C of warming compared to the 1850–1900 baseline in the second half of the current decade, with the time span between slow and fast warming covering between 20 and 27 years from present. The warming level of 2 °C of warming is reached as early as 2039 by the ensemble mean under SSP5-8.5 but as late as the mid-2060s under SSP1-2.6. The highest warming level considered (5 °C) is reached by the ensemble mean only under SSP5-8.5 and not until the mid-2090s.d-2090s.

Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMI↗

NASA NTRS2013

The Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP): Overview and Description of Models, Simulations and Climate Diagnostics

The Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) consists of a series of time slice experiments targeting the long-term changes in atmospheric composition between 1850 and 2100, with the goal of documenting composition changes and the associated radiative forcing. In this overview paper, we introduce the ACCMIP activity, the various simulations performed (with a requested set of 14) and the associated model output. The 16 ACCMIP models have a wide range of horizontal and vertical resolutions, vertical extent, chemistry schemes and interaction with radiation and clouds. While anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions were specified for all time slices in the ACCMIP protocol, it is found that the natural emissions are responsible for a significant range across models, mostly in the case of ozone precursors. The analysis of selected present-day climate diagnostics (precipitation, temperature, specific humidity and zonal wind) reveals biases consistent with state-of-the-art climate models. The model-to- model comparison of changes in temperature, specific humidity and zonal wind between 1850 and 2000 and between 2000 and 2100 indicates mostly consistent results. However, models that are clear outliers are different enough from the other models to significantly affect their simulation of atmospheric chemistry.

humidity↗

NASA NTRS2015

Pliocene Model Intercomparison (PlioMIP) Phase 2: Scientific Objectives and Experimental Design

climate change↗

NASA NTRS2011

Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP): Experimental Design and Boundary Conditions (Experiment 2)

The Palaeoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project has expanded to include a model intercomparison for the mid-Pliocene warm period (3.29 to 2.97 million yr ago). This project is referred to as PlioMIP (the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project). Two experiments have been agreed upon and together compose the initial phase of PlioMIP. The first (Experiment 1) is being performed with atmosphere only climate models. The second (Experiment 2) utilizes fully coupled ocean-atmosphere climate models. Following on from the publication of the experimental design and boundary conditions for Experiment 1 in Geoscientific Model Development, this paper provides the necessary description of differences and/or additions to the experimental design for Experiment 2.

Haywood, A. M.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Assessing Agricultural Risks of Climate Change in the 21st Century in a Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison

Here we present the results from an intercomparison of multiple global gridded crop models (GGCMs) within the framework of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project and the Inter-Sectoral Impacts Model Intercomparison Project. Results indicate strong negative effects of climate change, especially at higher levels of warming and at low latitudes; models that include explicit nitrogen stress project more severe impacts. Across seven GGCMs, five global climate models, and four representative concentration pathways, model agreement on direction of yield changes is found in many major agricultural regions at both low and high latitudes; however, reducing uncertainty in sign of response in mid-latitude regions remains a challenge. Uncertainties related to the representation of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and high temperature effects demonstrated here show that further research is urgently needed to better understand effects of climate change on agricultural production and to devise targeted adaptation strategies.

agriculture↗

NASA NTRS2012

The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP): Protocols and Pilot Studies

The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) is a major international effort linking the climate, crop, and economic modeling communities with cutting-edge information technology to produce improved crop and economic models and the next generation of climate impact projections for the agricultural sector. The goals of AgMIP are to improve substantially the characterization of world food security due to climate change and to enhance adaptation capacity in both developing and developed countries. Analyses of the agricultural impacts of climate variability and change require a transdisciplinary effort to consistently link state-of-the-art climate scenarios to crop and economic models. Crop model outputs are aggregated as inputs to regional and global economic models to determine regional vulnerabilities, changes in comparative advantage, price effects, and potential adaptation strategies in the agricultural sector. Climate, Crop Modeling, Economics, and Information Technology Team Protocols are presented to guide coordinated climate, crop modeling, economics, and information technology research activities around the world, along with AgMIP Cross-Cutting Themes that address uncertainty, aggregation and scaling, and the development of Representative Agricultural Pathways (RAPs) to enable testing of climate change adaptations in the context of other regional and global trends. The organization of research activities by geographic region and specific crops is described, along with project milestones. Pilot results demonstrate AgMIP's role in assessing climate impacts with explicit representation of uncertainties in climate scenarios and simulations using crop and economic models. An intercomparison of wheat model simulations near Obregón, Mexico reveals inter-model differences in yield sensitivity to [CO2] with model uncertainty holding approximately steady as concentrations rise, while uncertainty related to choice of crop model increases with rising temperatures. Wheat model simulations with midcentury climate scenarios project a slight decline in absolute yields that is more sensitive to selection of crop model than to global climate model, emissions scenario, or climate scenario downscaling method. A comparison of regional and national-scale economic simulations finds a large sensitivity of projected yield changes to the simulations' resolved scales. Finally, a global economic model intercomparison example demonstrates that improvements in the understanding of agriculture futures arise from integration of the range of uncertainty in crop, climate, and economic modeling results in multi-model assessments.

Rosenzweig, C.↗

NASA NTRS2022

Scientific Data From Precipitation Driver Response Model Intercomparison Project

This data descriptor reports the main scientific values from General Circulation Models (GCMs) in the Precipitation Driver and Response Model Intercomparison Project (PDRMIP). The purpose of the GCM simulations has been to enhance the scientific understanding of how changes in greenhouse gases, aerosols, and incoming solar radiation perturb the Earth’s radiation balance and its climate response in terms of changes in temperature and precipitation. Here we provide global and annual mean results for a large set of coupled atmospheric-ocean GCM simulations and a description of how to easily extract files from the dataset. The simulations consist of single idealized perturbations to the climate system and have been shown to achieve important insight in complex climate simulations. We therefore expect this data set to be valuable and highly used to understand simulations from complex GCMs and Earth System Models for various phases of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project

Precipitation Driver Response Model Intercompariso↗

NASA NTRS2016

The Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP) Phase 2: Scientific Objectives and Experimental Design

The Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP) is a co-ordinated international climate modelling initiative to study and understand climate and environments of the Late Pliocene, as well as their potential relevance in the context of future climate change. PlioMIP examines the consistency of model predictions in simulating Pliocene climate and their ability to reproduce climate signals preserved by geological climate archives. Here we provide a description of the aim and objectives of the next phase of the model intercomparison project (PlioMIP Phase 2), and we present the experimental design and boundary conditions that will be utilized for climate model experiments in Phase 2. Following on from PlioMIP Phase 1, Phase 2 will continue to be a mechanism for sampling structural uncertainty within climate models. However, Phase 1 demonstrated the requirement to better understand boundary condition uncertainties as well as uncertainty in the methodologies used for data-model comparison. Therefore, our strategy for Phase 2 is to utilize state-of-the-art boundary conditions that have emerged over the last 5 years. These include a new palaeogeographic reconstruction, detailing ocean bathymetry and land-ice surface topography. The ice surface topography is built upon the lessons learned from offline ice sheet modelling studies. Land surface cover has been enhanced by recent additions of Pliocene soils and lakes. Atmospheric reconstructions of palaeo-CO2 are emerging on orbital timescales, and these are also incorporated into PlioMIP Phase 2. New records of surface and sea surface temperature change are being produced that will be more temporally consistent with the boundary conditions and forcings used within models. Finally we have designed a suite of prioritized experiments that tackle issues surrounding the basic understanding of the Pliocene and its relevance in the context of future climate change in a discrete way.

climate models↗

NASA NTRS2024

Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project Phase 3 (PlioMIP3) – Science Plan and Experimental Design

The Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP) was initiated in 2008. Over two phases PlioMIP has helped co-ordinate the experimental design and publication strategy of the community, which has included an increasing number of climate models and modelling groups from around the world. It has engaged with palaeoenvironmental scientists to foster new data synthesis supporting the construction of new model boundary conditions, as well as to facilitate new data-model comparisons. The work has advanced our understanding of Pliocene climates and environments, enhanced our knowledge regarding the ability of complex climate and Earth System models to accurately simulate climate change, and helped to refine our estimates of how sensitive the climate system is to forcing conditions. In this community protocol paper, we outline the scientific plan for PlioMIP Phase 3 (PlioMIP3). This plan provides the required guidance to participating modelling groups from around the world to successfully set up and perform PlioMIP3 climate model experiments. The project is open to new participants from the scientific community (both from the climate modelling and geosciences communities). In PlioMIP3, we retain the PlioMIP2 Core experiments (Eoi 400 , E 280 ) and extend the Core requirements to include either an experiment focussed on the Early Pliocene or an alternative Late Pliocene simulation (or both). These additions (a) allow a comparison of Early and Late Pliocene warm intervals and help build research connections and synergy with the MioMIP (Miocene Model Intercomparison Project - also known as DeepMIP-Miocene) and PlioMioVAR projects (Pliocene-Miocene Variability Working Group), and (b) create an alternative time slice simulation for 3.205 Ma (MIS KM5c) through removal of some of the largest palaeogeographic differences introduced between PlioMIP1 and 2 resulting in minimal land-sea mask variations from the modern. In addition, we present ten optional experiments designed to enhance our assessment of climate sensitivity and to explore the uncertainty in greenhouse gas-related forcing. For the first time, we introduce orbital sensitivity experiments into the science plan, as well as simulations incorporating dynamic vegetation-climate feedbacks and an experiment designed to examine the potential significance of East Antarctic Ice Sheet boundary condition uncertainty. These changes enhance palaeo-to-future scientific connections and enable an exploration of the significance of palaeogeographic uncertainties on climate simulations.

Climate modelling↗

NASA NTRS2023

The Regional Aerosol Model Intercomparison Project (RAMIP)

Changes in anthropogenic aerosol emissions have strongly contributed to global and regional trends in temperature, precipitation, and other climate characteristics and have been one of the dominant drivers of decadal trends in Asian and African precipitation. These and other influences on regional climate from changes in aerosol emissions are expected to continue and potentially strengthen in the coming decades. However, a combination of large uncertainties in emission pathways, radiative forcing, and the dynamical response to forcing makes anthropogenic aerosol a key factor in the spread of near-term climate projections, particularly on regional scales, and therefore an important one to constrain. For example, in terms of future emission pathways, the uncertainty in future global aerosol and precursor gas emissions by 2050 is as large as the total increase in emissions since 1850. In terms of aerosol effective radiative forcing, which remains the largest source of uncertainty in future climate change projections, CMIP6 models span a factor of 5, from −0.3 to −1.5 W m−2. Both of these sources of uncertainty are exacerbated on regional scales. The Regional Aerosol Model Intercomparison Project (RAMIP) will deliver experiments designed to quantify the role of regional aerosol emissions changes in near-term projections. This is unlike any prior MIP, where the focus has been on changes in global emissions and/or very idealised aerosol experiments. Perturbing regional emissions makes RAMIP novel from a scientific standpoint and links the intended analyses more directly to mitigation and adaptation policy issues. From a science perspective, there is limited information on how realistic regional aerosol emissions impact local as well as remote climate conditions. Here, RAMIP will enable an evaluation of the full range of potential influences of realistic and regionally varied aerosol emission changes on near-future climate. From the policy perspective, RAMIP addresses the burning question of how local and remote decisions affecting emissions of aerosols influence climate change in any given region. Here, RAMIP will provide the information needed to make direct links between regional climate policies and regional climate change. RAMIP experiments are designed to explore sensitivities to aerosol type and location and provide improved constraints on uncertainties driven by aerosol radiative forcing and the dynamical response to aerosol changes. The core experiments will assess the effects of differences in future global and regional (Africa and the Middle East, East Asia, North America and Europe, and South Asia) aerosol emission trajectories through 2051, while optional experiments will test the nonlinear effects of varying emission locations and aerosol types along this future trajectory. All experiments are based on the shared socioeconomic pathways and are intended to be performed with 6th Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) generation models, initialised from the CMIP6 historical experiments, to facilitate comparisons with existing projections. Requested outputs will enable the analysis of the role of aerosol in near-future changes in, for example, temperature and precipitation means and extremes, storms, and air quality.

anthropogenic aerosol emissions↗

NASA NTRS2013

Tropospheric Ozone Changes, Radiative Forcing and Attribution to Emissions in the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP)

Ozone (O3) from 17 atmospheric chemistry models taking part in the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) has been used to calculate tropospheric ozone radiative forcings (RFs). All models applied a common set of anthropogenic emissions, which are better constrained for the present-day than the past. Future anthropogenic emissions follow the four Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios, which define a relatively narrow range of possible air pollution emissions. We calculate a value for the pre-industrial (1750) to present-day (2010) tropospheric ozone RF of 410 mW m−2. The model range of pre-industrial to present-day changes in O3 produces a spread (+/-1 standard deviation) in RFs of +/-17%. Three different radiation schemes were used - we find differences in RFs between schemes (for the same ozone fields) of +/-10 percent. Applying two different tropopause definitions gives differences in RFs of +/-3 percent. Given additional (unquantified) uncertainties associated with emissions, climate-chemistry interactions and land-use change, we estimate an overall uncertainty of +/-30 percent for the tropospheric ozone RF. Experiments carried out by a subset of six models attribute tropospheric ozone RF to increased emissions of methane (44+/-12 percent), nitrogen oxides (31 +/- 9 percent), carbon monoxide (15 +/- 3 percent) and non-methane volatile organic compounds (9 +/- 2 percent); earlier studies attributed more of the tropospheric ozone RF to methane and less to nitrogen oxides. Normalising RFs to changes in tropospheric column ozone, we find a global mean normalised RF of 42 mW m(−2) DU(−1), a value similar to previous work. Using normalised RFs and future tropospheric column ozone projections we calculate future tropospheric ozone RFs (mW m(−2); relative to 1750) for the four future scenarios (RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6.0 and RCP8.5) of 350, 420, 370 and 460 (in 2030), and 200, 300, 280 and 600 (in 2100). Models show some coherent responses of ozone to climate change: decreases in the tropical lower troposphere, associated with increases in water vapour; and increases in the sub-tropical to mid-latitude upper troposphere, associated with increases in lightning and stratosphere-to-troposphere transport. Climate change has relatively small impacts on global mean tropospheric ozone RF.

climate change↗

NASA NTRS2013

Large-Scale Features of Pliocene Climate: Results from the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project

Climate and environments of the mid-Pliocene warm period (3.264 to 3.025 Ma) have been extensively studied.Whilst numerical models have shed light on the nature of climate at the time, uncertainties in their predictions have not been systematically examined. The Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project quantifies uncertainties in model outputs through a coordinated multi-model and multi-mode data intercomparison. Whilst commonalities in model outputs for the Pliocene are clearly evident, we show substantial variation in the sensitivity of models to the implementation of Pliocene boundary conditions. Models appear able to reproduce many regional changes in temperature reconstructed from geological proxies. However, data model comparison highlights that models potentially underestimate polar amplification. To assert this conclusion with greater confidence, limitations in the time-averaged proxy data currently available must be addressed. Furthermore, sensitivity tests exploring the known unknowns in modelling Pliocene climate specifically relevant to the high latitudes are essential (e.g. palaeogeography, gateways, orbital forcing and trace gasses). Estimates of longer-term sensitivity to CO2 (also known as Earth System Sensitivity; ESS), support previous work suggesting that ESS is greater than Climate Sensitivity (CS), and suggest that the ratio of ESS to CS is between 1 and 2, with a "best" estimate of 1.5.

mathematical models↗

NASA NTRS1997

Evaluation of Tropospheric Water Vapor Simulations from the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project

Simulations of humidity from 28 general circulation models for the period 1979-88 from the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project are compared with observations from radiosondes over North America and the globe and with satellite microwave observations over the Pacific basin. The simulations of decadal mean values of precipitable water (W) integrated over each of these regions tend to be less moist than the real atmosphere in all three cases; the median model values are approximately 5% less than the observed values. The spread among the simulations is larger over regions of high terrain, which suggests that differences in methods of resolving topographic features are important. The mean elevation of the North American continent is substantially higher in the models than is observed, which may contribute to the overall dry bias of the models over that area. The authors do not find a clear association between the mean topography of a model and its mean W simulation, however, which suggests that the bias over land is not purely a matter of orography. The seasonal cycle of W is reasonably well simulated by the models, although over North America they have a tendency to become moister more quickly in the spring than is observed. The interannual component of the variability of W is not well captured by the models over North America. Globally, the simulated W values show a signal correlated with the Southern Oscillation index but the observations do not. This discrepancy may be related to deficiencies in the radiosonde network, which does not sample the tropical ocean regions well. Overall, the interannual variability of W, as well as its climatology and mean seasonal cycle, are better described by the median of the 28 simulations than by individual members of the ensemble. Tests to learn whether simulated precipitable water, evaporation, and precipitation values may be related to aspects of model formulation yield few clear signals, although the authors find, for example, a tendency for the few models that predict boundary layer depth to have large values of evaporation and precipitation. Controlled experiments, in which aspects of model architecture are systematically varied within individual models, may be necessary to elucidate whether and how model characteristics influence simulations.

Gaffen, Dian J.↗