Uncertainty in land surface temperature simulation over China by CMIP3/CMIP5 models

In this paper, China-based observations are used to evaluate the performance of 24 CMIP3 (phase 3 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) and 10 CMIP5 models in simulating land surface temperature (LST). It is found that all models can generally reproduce the climatology patterns of LST averaged during the period from 1960 to 1999. Further analyses of the regional features of LST show that the discrepancies between the observations and the simulations are smaller in Southwest and East China. Moreover, these models overestimate the temperatures in almost all areas, particularly in July. Although many models have large biases relative to the observations, the spread of the model results is large (i.e., >22 °C in Northwest and Northeast China). For the interannual variations, neither the individual models nor the multi-model mean has a remarkable positive correlation to the observations in the selected subregions. However, most models can capture geographic features during trend evaluations. A multi-model ensemble is believed to be an effective way to limit uncertainties, but the results suggest that its efficiency is restricted to simulating the LST trend. Examination of the surface energy budget indicated that the modeled discrepancies of net shortwave radiation and surface sensible heat flux may be responsible for the LST results, especially in July. It is concluded that the ability of current models in simulating LST over China is still a significant challenge. The spread of the models is large in simulating the climatology, interannual variation, and trend of LSTs. In general, the magnitudes of the spread may be as large as the magnitudes of the observations. Additionally, it is found that multi-model ensembles do not simulate LST with any more skill. Therefore, more work must focus on the limitations of the models' uncertainties in land surface research.     

7个CMIP5模式的平流层、对流层温度趋势与SSU/MSU观测资料的对比

采用1979—2005年美国大气海洋局(NOAA)的卫星观测资料和IPCC第5次全球气候变化比较试验(CMIP5)的模式资料,对全球对流层和平流层近26 a的气温趋势进行了研究。结果表明,CMIP5模拟的全球平均大气温度趋势与观测结果较一致,能够再现平流层冷却和对流层增温等特点,但是在气温趋势的经纬度分布上,模式资料与观测资料间存在较大差异,同时模式间也存在明显的不一致。与观测资料相比,CMIP5模式资料低估了平流层在热带地区的降温速率,而且明显高估了对流层中部到平流层下层的南极区域的降温趋势。不同CMIP5模式间的最大标准方差出现在平流层的南北极区域,但是在对流层所有纬度上标准方差都保持着较小值。     

Long-term surface air temperature trend and the possible impact on historical warming in CMIP5 models

模式对历史气候变化的模拟往往延用工业革命前控制试验(PICTL)的物理过程及设置,同时使用PICTL的模拟结果作为初值。因此,控制试验(PICTL)中是否存在气候漂移将直接影响模式对全球变暖的模拟。本文评估了27个CMIP5模式模拟的气温长期漂移趋势及其对全球变暖模拟的影响。结果表明,大部分模式模拟的全球平均气温的长期漂移趋势都很小(0.06°C/100 a),但个别模式对于全球变暖的模拟存在较大影响。在50°S~65°S纬度带内的南大洋,40°N以北的北大西洋和北太平洋区域,大部分模式模拟的气温漂移趋势对局地变暖的模拟影响较大(10%~20%)。大气层顶向上长波辐射和向上短波辐射共同影响全球气温的长期变化。另外,积分时间越长,中高纬深层海洋得到有效调整,气温的长期漂移趋势越小。本文量化了气候漂移,检验了模式的稳定性,这有助于评估模式对全球变暖的模拟能力。     

Assessment of aerosol effective radiative forcing and surface air temperature response over eastern China in CMIP5 models

气溶胶有效辐射强迫是评估气溶胶气候效应的有效指标。本文利用国际耦合模式比较计划(CMIP5)中7个模式的模拟结果,评估了模式对东亚地区气溶胶光学厚度和有效辐射强迫的模拟水平,并分析了东亚地区平均地表温度对局地人为气溶胶强迫的响应。研究结果显示,大部分模式低估了中国东部和西南部污染地区的气溶胶光学厚度,这可能与模式中气溶胶局地排放、化学过程以及模式分辨率有关;多模式平均的东亚地区气溶胶有效辐射强迫为.4.14 W m.2,气溶胶在东亚地区有明显的降温效应,1850–2005年气溶胶浓度增加使得东亚地区降温.1.05°C。     

Parallel comparison of the northern winter stratospheric circulation in reanalysis and in CMIP5 models

A parallel comparison is made of the circulation climatology and the leading oscillation mode of the northern winter stratosphere among six reanalysis products and 24 CMIP5(Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5) models. The results reveal that the NCEP/NCAR, NECP/DOE, ERA40, ERA-Interim and JRA25 reanalyses are quite consistent in describing the climatology and annual cycle of the stratospheric circulation. The 20 CR reanalysis, however, exhibits a remarkable"cold pole" bias accompanied by a much stronger stratospheric polar jet, similar as in some CMIP5 models. Compared to the1–2 month seasonal drift in most coupled general circulation models(GCMs), the seasonal cycle of the stratospheric zonal wind in most earth system models(ESMs) agrees very well with reanalysis. Similar to the climatology, the amplitude of Polar Vortex Oscillation(PVO) events also varies among CMIP5 models. The PVO amplitude in most GCMs is relatively weaker than in reanalysis, while that in most of the ESMs is more realistic. In relation to the "cold pole" bias and the weaker oscillation in some CMIP5 GCMs, the frequency of PVO events is significantly underestimated by CMIP5 GCMs; while in most ESMs, it is comparable to that in reanalysis. The PVO events in reanalysis(except in 20CR) mainly occur from mid-winter to early spring(January–March); but in some of the CMIP5 models, a 1–2 month delay exists, especially in most of the CMIP5 GCMs. The long-term trend of the PVO time series does not correspond to long-term changes in the frequency of PVO events in most of the CMIP5 models.     

Planetary albedo in strongly forced climate, as simulated by the CMIP3 models

In an ensemble of general circulation models, the global mean albedo significantly decreases in response to strong CO₂ forcing. In some of the models, the magnitude of this positive feedback is as large as the CO₂ forcing itself. The models agree well on the surface contribution to the trend, due to retreating snow and ice cover, but display large differences when it comes to the contribution from shortwave radiative effects of clouds. The ??cloud contribution?? defined as the difference between clear-sky and all-sky albedo anomalies and denoted as ??CC is correlated with equilibrium climate sensitivity in the models (correlation coefficient 0.76), indicating that in high sensitivity models the clouds to a greater extent act to enhance the negative clear-sky albedo trend, whereas in low sensitivity models the clouds rather counteract this trend. As a consequence, the total albedo trend is more negative in more sensitive models (correlation coefficient 0.73). This illustrates in a new way the importance of cloud response to global warming in determining climate sensitivity in models. The cloud contribution to the albedo trend can primarily be ascribed to changes in total cloud fraction, but changes in cloud albedo may also be of importance.     

CMIP6HighResMIP对青藏高原气候模拟的评估和预估

高分辨率模式模拟被认为是研究资料相对欠缺的青藏高原地区气候变化的重要方法之一。第六次国际耦合模式比较计划(CMIP6)新增了高分辨率模式比较计划(HighResMIP),但其对青藏高原气候的模拟性能尚未系统评估。本研究分析了6对(更高、较低分辨率)CMIP6 HighResMIP模式对青藏高原当前气候的模拟能力,并集合预估了近期青藏高原气候的变化趋势。相对较粗分辨率模拟,所有(2/3)模式的更高分辨率模拟减少了平均降水(气温)的区域平均偏差。泰勒图涉及指标的综合评估显示,约1/3模式的更高分辨率对平均气温和降水模拟效果优于较低分辨率,其余模式的更高分辨率则接近或者劣于较低分辨率。集合平均结果优于单个模式,且其更高分辨率模拟效果总体优于较低分辨率。更高分辨率模式集合预估显示,相对于1995—2014年,在SSP5-8.5情景下到2021—2040年青藏高原整体呈增温趋势,东南部增温相对较弱;降水从北到南呈增加-减少-增加的变化模态;青藏高原气温将平均增加(0.81±0.91)℃,降水将平均增加(0.05±0.25) mm/d。     

Covariability of SST and surface heat fluxes in reanalyses and CMIP3 climate models

The generation and dissipation of SST anomalies is mediated by the covariability of SST and surface heat fluxes. The connection between the variability of heat flux (including its radiative and turbulent components) and that of SST is investigated using the NCEP-NCAR and ERA-40 reanalyses and the CMIP3 multi-model collection of climate simulations. The covariance patterns of SST and heat flux are broadly similar in the two reanalyses. The upward heat fluxes are positively correlated with the SST anomalies in the tropics, the northern Pacific mid-latitudes, and over the Gulf Stream, and negatively correlated in the northern subtropics and the SPCZ region. Common covariance features are seen in all climate models in the tropics and the subtropics, while covariances differ considerably among models at northern mid-latitudes, where weak values of the ensemble mean are seen. Lagged covariances are broadly similar in the two reanalyses and among the models, implying that heat flux feedback is also similar. The heat flux feedback parameter is determined from the lagged cross-covariances together with the auto-covariance of SST. Feedback is generally negative and is dominated by the turbulent component. The strongest feedback is found at mid-latitudes in both hemispheres, with the largest values occurring in the western and central portions of the oceans with extensions to higher latitudes. The latter are also areas with large inter-model differences. The heat flux feedback strengthens in winter and fall and weakens in spring and summer. The magnitudes of the annual and seasonal feedback parameters are slightly weaker in most models compared to the reanalysis-based estimates. The mean model feedback parameter has the best pattern correlation and the smallest mean square difference compared to the reanalysis-based values, although spatial variances are weak. Model resolution shows no relationship with the heat flux feedback parameters obtained from model results. The SST-heat flux covariance is decomposed into components associated with surface heat flux feedback and atmospheric forcing processes. Heat flux feedback dominates over the atmospheric forcing and heat flux damps SST anomalies on average at northern Pacific mid-latitudes and southern Atlantic mid-latitudes; while the reverse occurs in the SPCZ and northern Atlantic mid-latitudes.     

CMIP6与CMIP5对历史大气层顶和地表辐射收支模拟的时空对比

基于云和地球辐射能量系统观测数据集（CERES),对比分析了耦合模式比较计划第五（CMIP5）和第六阶段（CMIP6）模拟的历史大气层顶和地表辐射收支的年际变化和空间分布,明确了多模式间不确定性大的关键区域。结果表明：在年际尺度上,除地表向上长波辐射外,CMIP6的辐射分量的集合均值较CMIP5更接近于CERES观测值,全球地表向下短波辐射的高估和大气逆辐射的低估在CMIP6中分别降低了1.9 W/m²和3.3 W/m²。除大气逆辐射外,CMIP6的辐射分量在多模式间的一致性较CMIP5提高。在北极,CMIP6对大气层顶反射短波、大气层顶出射长波和地表向下短波辐射的模拟偏差较CMIP5大。在南北纬60°,CMIP6对大气逆辐射的模拟偏差较CMIP5大。其他区域CMIP6的辐射分量更接近CERES观测值。CMIP6模拟的地表向下短波辐射和大气逆辐射的不确定性较大区域面积较CMIP5减小,但不确定性极大区域面积无变化。地表净辐射的不确定性空间分布在两代CMIP间变化甚小。青藏高原、赤道太平洋、热带雨林、阿拉伯半岛和南极洲沿海依然是地球系统模式模拟辐射收支不确定性极大的关键区域。     

CMIP5模式对ENSO现象的模拟能力评估

针对参与耦合模式比较计划(CMIP5)的17个海-气耦合模式对20世纪气候的模拟结果,从热带太平洋海表温度和大气海平面气压变化的综合分析角度较详细评估了模式对厄尔尼诺-南方涛动(ENSO)现象的模拟能力。结果表明,这些模式基本上能模拟出ENSO现象的一些主要特征,包括热带太平洋海温的空间分布及其时空演变特征、与海平面气压变化的关联、ENSO周期变化及锁相特征等,但不同模式的模拟结果仍然差异较大。(1)从模拟的热带太平洋年平均海温的偏差来看,多模式集合平均值与观测的均方根误差小于1.0℃,但单个模式的误差相对要大一些。误差较小的为1.2—1.3℃,多数模式在1.6℃以下,但也有个别模式的误差超过2.0℃。(2)从经验正交函数分解结果来看,热带太平洋实测月平均海表温度距平和海平面气压距平的年际尺度变化第1模态主要表现为ENSO变化特征,第2模态反映的是海温的长期变化趋势。只有少数几个CMIP5模式能够再现这种特征,多数模式所模拟的海温距平/海平面气压距平时空变化的第1、第2特征向量分布顺序与观测分析正好相反,ENSO变成了第2模态,趋势成了最主要的模态。尽管如此,所有模式都能模拟出南方涛动变化与热带太平洋海温距平时空变化的密切关联,无论是作为第1还是第2特征模态,所有模式模拟的南方涛动与热带太平洋海温距平时空变化都有密切相关。(3)谱分析结果表明,ENSO现象具有2—7年的周期,其中,4年的周期最明显。大多数模式模拟的ENSO周期在此范围内,但有些模式的主要周期偏短,为2年左右。个别模式的ENSO主要周期为11年,已超出2—7年的范围。(4)多数模式模拟的厄尔尼诺及拉尼娜的峰值出现在冬季(11—2月),与观测基本吻合。另有少数模式模拟的峰值出现在9—10月,比观测略提前。只有个别模式模拟的峰值出现在夏季,与观测相差太大。     

CMIP3及CMIP5模式对冬季和春季北极涛动变率模拟的比较

结合NCEP再分析资料,评估了28个参加第五次耦合模式比较计划（CMIP5）的耦合模式对1950-2000年冬、春季北极涛动（AO）变率的模拟能力,并与CMIP3模式模拟结果进行了对比。结果表明,尽管CMIP5模式没能模拟出冬、春季AO指数前30年处于显著的负位相期而后20年处于显著的正位相期的特征,但是基本能够模拟出冬、春季AO指数1950-2000年显著的增强趋势以及振荡周期,多模式集合改进了模拟效果。同样,CMIP3模式没能模拟出冬、春季AO指数前30年处于显著的负位相而后20年处于显著的正位相的特征,而且1950-2000年冬、春季AO指数的增强趋势在CMIP3模式模拟结果中也没有表现出来,多模式集合没有改进模式模拟效果。不仅如此,CMIP3模式对AO指数的长期变化周期模拟不好,只是模拟出了冬季周期为2～3 a的振荡,没有模拟出春季AO指数的4～5 a振荡周期。尽管CMIP5模式对冬、春季AO指数的模拟能力还不够理想,没有完全模拟出AO指数的变化特征,但是相对于CMIP3模式,无论是对AO指数变化趋势的模拟还是对其变化周期的模拟,CMIP5模式都有所提高。     

Current and future atmospheric circulation at 500 hPa over Greenland simulated by the CMIP3 and CMIP5 global models

The Greenland ice sheet is projected to be strongly affected by global warming. These projections are either issued from downscaling methods (such as Regional Climate Models) or they come directly from General Circulation Models (GCMs). In this context, it is necessary to evaluate the accuracy of the daily atmospheric circulation simulated by the GCMs, since it is used as forcing for downscaling methods. Thus, we use an automatic circulation type classification based on two indices (Euclidean distance and Spearman rank correlation using the daily 500 hPa geopotential height) to evaluate the ability of the GCMs from both CMIP3 and CMIP5 databases to simulate the main circulation types over Greenland during summer. For each circulation type, the GCMs are compared to three reanalysis datasets on the basis of their frequency and persistence differences. For the current climate (1961–1990), we show that most of the GCMs do not reproduce the expected frequency and the persistence of the circulation types and that they simulate poorly the observed daily variability of the general circulation. Only a few GCMs can be used as reliable forcings for downscaling methods over Greenland. Finally, when applying the same approach to the future projections of the GCMs, no significant change in the atmospheric circulation over Greenland is detected, besides a generalised increase of the geopotential height due to a uniform warming of the atmosphere.     

Evaluating the performance of CMIP3 and CMIP5 global climate models over the north-east Atlantic region

One of the main sources of uncertainty in estimating climate projections affected by global warming is the choice of the global climate model (GCM). The aim of this study is to evaluate the skill of GCMs from CMIP3 and CMIP5 databases in the north-east Atlantic Ocean region. It is well known that the seasonal and interannual variability of surface inland variables (e.g. precipitation and snow) and ocean variables (e.g. wave height and storm surge) are linked to the atmospheric circulation patterns. Thus, an automatic synoptic classification, based on weather types, has been used to assess whether GCMs are able to reproduce spatial patterns and climate variability. Three important factors have been analyzed: the skill of GCMs to reproduce the synoptic situations, the skill of GCMs to reproduce the historical inter-annual variability and the consistency of GCMs experiments during twenty-first century projections. The results of this analysis indicate that the most skilled GCMs in the study region are UKMO-HadGEM2, ECHAM5/MPI-OM and MIROC3.2(hires) for CMIP3 scenarios and ACCESS1.0, EC-EARTH, HadGEM2-CC, HadGEM2-ES and CMCC-CM for CMIP5 scenarios. These models are therefore recommended for the estimation of future regional multi-model projections of surface variables driven by the atmospheric circulation in the north-east Atlantic Ocean region.     

A transition from CMIP3 to CMIP5 for climate information providers: the case of surface temperature over eastern North America

The release of new data constituting the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project—Phase 5 (CMIP5) database is an important event in both climate science and climate services issues. Although users’ eagerness for a fast transition from CMIP3 to CMIP5 is expected, this change implies some challenges for climate information providers. The main reason is that the two sets of experiments were performed in different ways regarding radiative forcing and hence continuity between both datasets is partially lost. The objective of this research is to evaluate a metric that is independent of the amount and the evolution of radiative forcing, hence facilitating comparison between the two sets for surface temperature over eastern North America. The link between CMIP3 and CMIP5 data sets is explored spatially and locally (using the ratio of local to global temperatures) through the use of regional warming patterns, a relationship between the grid-box and the global mean temperature change for a certain time frame. Here, we show that local to global ratios are effective tools in making climate change information between the two sets comparable. As a response to the global mean temperature change, both CMIP experiments show very similar warming patterns, trends, and climate change uncertainty for both winter and summer. Sensitivity of the models to radiative forcing is not assessed. Real inter-model differences remain the largest source of uncertainty when calculating warming patterns as well as spatially-based patterns for the pattern scaling approach. This relationship between the datasets, which may escape users when they are provided with a single radiative forcing pathway, needs to be stressed by climate information providers.     

Representation of the Caribbean mean diurnal cycle in observation, reanalysis, and CMIP3 model datasets

This study explores how the Caribbean mean diurnal cycle is represented in observed, reanalyzed, and general circulation model data of the CMIP3 generation, with a focus on the central Antilles Islands (18–21° N, 80–66° W). Their trade wind climate, high solar forcing, and eastward decrease in size challenge dataset ability to represent a diurnal cycle of sufficient amplitude and correct phase. The mean difference between maximum and minimum temperature (ΔT) provides a useful metric, and values of 5–12°C are observed at stations around the Caribbean basin. The ΔT in various reanalyses and CMIP3 models generally yield correct values over South America, but few exhibit elevated ΔT over the central Antilles Islands. NCEP2 and ECMWF reanalyses differ in their representation despite similar resolution, the latter reflecting elevated ΔT. Only one of the four CMIP3 models evaluated correctly simulates Antilles ΔT, but does so with a dry bias. An intercomparison of mean diurnal rainfall in the Antilles is conducted. According to satellite and high-resolution reanalysis, the rain rate doubles in the afternoon. However NCEP2/ECMWF reanalysis and CMIP3 models yield an amplitude about half the observed and exhibit a nocturnal peak typical of marine climates. The reason for the variety of outcomes is related to model parameterizations that translate surface fluxes to boundary layer responses, and to horizontal resolution that affects the representation of sea breeze confluence over large islands.     

Equator-to-pole temperature differences and the extra-tropical storm track responses of the CMIP5 climate models

This paper aims to understand the physical processes causing the large spread in the storm track projections of the CMIP5 climate models. In particular, the relationship between the climate change responses of the storm tracks, as measured by the 2–6 day mean sea level pressure variance, and the equator-to-pole temperature differences at upper- and lower-tropospheric levels is investigated. In the southern hemisphere the responses of the upper- and lower-tropospheric temperature differences are correlated across the models and as a result they share similar associations with the storm track responses. There are large regions in which the storm track responses are correlated with the temperature difference responses, and a simple linear regression model based on the temperature differences at either level captures the spatial pattern of the mean storm track response as well explaining between 30 and 60 % of the inter-model variance of the storm track responses. In the northern hemisphere the responses of the two temperature differences are not significantly correlated and their associations with the storm track responses are more complicated. In summer, the responses of the lower-tropospheric temperature differences dominate the inter-model spread of the storm track responses. In winter, the responses of the upper- and lower-temperature differences both play a role. The results suggest that there is potential to reduce the spread in storm track responses by constraining the relative magnitudes of the warming in the tropical and polar regions.