Potential Link Between Ice Nucleation and Climate Model Spread in Arctic Amplification
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Ivy Tan↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
A Barotropic Mechanism for the Response of Jet Stream Variability to Arctic Amplification and Sea Ice Loss
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Bryn Ronalds↗
An Intercomparison of Changes Associated with Earth's Lower Tropospheric Temperature Using Traditional and AMIP-Style Reanalyses
Reanalyses have become an integral tool for evaluating regional and global climate variations, and an important component of this is modifications to the energy budget. Reductions in Arctic Sea ice extent has induced an albedo feedback, causing the Arctic to warm more rapidly than anywhere else in the world, referred to as "Arctic Amplification." This has been demonstrated by observations and numerous reanalyses, including the Modern Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2). However, the Arctic Amplification signal is non-existent in a ten member ensemble of the MERRA-2 Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (M2AMIP) simulations, using the same prescribed climate forcing, including Sea Surface Temperature (SST) and ice. An evaluation of the temperature tendency within the lower troposphere due to radiation, moisture, and dynamics as well as the surface energy budget in MERRA-2 and M2AMIP will demonstrate that despite identical prescribed SSTs and sea ice in both versions, enhanced warming in the Arctic in MERRA-2 is in response to the analysis increment tendency due to temperature observations. Furthermore, the role of boundary conditions, model biases and changes in observing systems on the Arctic Amplification signal will be assessed. Literature on the topic of Arctic Amplification demonstrates that the enhanced warming begins in the mid-1990s. Anomalously warm Arctic SST in the early time period of MERRA-2 can mute the trend in Arctic lower troposphere temperature without the constraint of observations in M2AMIP. Additionally, MERRA-2 uses three distinct datasets of SST and sea ice concentration, which also plays a role.
Arcti↗
Clouds in the Arctic Climate System: A Force for Change?
Clouds play a central role in the global climate system through the modulation of Earth’s energy flows and as a mediator of precipitation. In the Arctic, clouds are also a major player; however, the processes that govern cloud evolution in the Arctic differ from most of the other regions of the globe. Thus, clouds are a key “wildcard” within the Arctic climate system that could have a substantial influence on the Arctic climate system response to anthropogenic forcing. What is the role of clouds within the phenomenon known as Arctic Amplification? This is question does not have a clear answer. Clouds seem to be a center to the important processes driving Arctic Amplification (e.g., the atmospheric response to sea ice loss and airmass transformation), however feedback analysis studies indicate that net cloud feedback in the Arctic is small. This seminar discusses the role of clouds within the Arctic Amplification processes reviewing aspects of what we know about Arctic clouds and the uncertainties that limit our ability to model them. Results from recently published and ongoing work are presented that provide an observationally-based estimate of the cloud-sea ice feedback and evaluate cloud properties within models. The goal of this presentation is to ignite a discussion and new collaborations around the best approaches to resolving uncertainties related to the role of clouds with the Arctic system and how to better represent Arctic clouds in models.
Patrick C Taylor↗
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)↗
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↗
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↗
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↗
Role of ocean coupling in the weakening of the extratropical storm tracks from Arctic sea ice loss
Abstract Within the changing climate, the Northern Hemisphere storm tracks have been projected to shift poleward and expand eastward. Changes in the Northern Hemisphere storm tracks arise from a variety of sometimes competing effects on the region's baroclinicity. Arctic amplification weakens the meridional temperature gradient, hence weakening the storm track, while low-latitude warming has the opposite effect, and surface-amplified warming at high latitudes reduces static stability. To determine the mechanisms driving these competing changes, we use a hierarchy of models with different levels of ocean-atmosphere coupling, using forcings from the Polar Amplification Model Intercomparison Project (PAMIP) to assess the role of Arctic sea ice loss on the Northern Hemisphere storm tracks. We find that ocean-atmosphere coupling enhances and sharpens the weakening of both the North Atlantic and North Pacific storm tracks in response to Arctic sea ice loss, that surface turbulent heat flux modulates the intensity of the weakening, and that local ocean dynamics controls the meridional location of the response. A moist isentropic diagnostic of the atmospheric overturning circulation shows that most of the weakening of the storm tracks and its associated changes in atmospheric heat transport (AHT) arise from a weakening of the transient eddy mass flux. Poleward of the storm tracks, the AHT also decreases, but through weakened effective stratification rather than weakening mass fluxes, an effect which occurs even in the absence of ocean dynamical coupling.
Audette, Alexandre (ORCID:0000000163321088)↗
Search for a Cloud Phase Feedback in the Arctic Climate System
This project was motivated by a hypothesis involving the transition in lower troposphere temperatures across the freezing point of water. Specifically, at temperatures just below to about ten degrees below freezing, Arctic clouds should be in a mixed-phase, with strong influences from secondary ice production (e.g., the Hallett-Mossop process). At temperatures just above freezing, clouds should become entirely deglaciated. We hypothesized that, with multiple years of ARM data, a statistically significant change could be detected in cloud radiative properties and surface radiative fluxes that could be directly attributed to this phase change. Furthermore, in a gradually warming climate, these phase change-related responses in surface radiation would represent a cloud phase feedback as part of Arctic amplification. We designed this research project to coincide with a new ARM Arctic cloud radar product developed by Ed Luke and collaborators at BNL (Luke et al., 2021: PNAS, doi:10.1073/pnas.2021387118) that explicitly contains SIP cloud properties retrieved from radar data. This research project has successfully concluded after analysis of a much larger North Slope of Alaska (NSA) data sample than originally anticipated, and the results are quite different than originally hypothesized.
58 GEOSCIENCES↗
Surface radiation trends at North Slope of Alaska influenced by large-scale circulation and atmospheric rivers
Arctic amplification manifests as a pervasive warming trend emerging over the past century in near-surface air temperature throughout the Arctic that is double the globally averaged temperature increase throughout most of the year. It results from complex processes involving oceanic, atmospheric and terrestrial components which require detailed study to discern roles of the fundamental processes involved to improve predictions of the Arctic environment. We report on signals that are beginning to emerge, on a timescale predicted by recent satellite remote sensing studies, from the unique 25 year record of detailed surface-based radiometer measurements obtained by the US Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Facility North Slope of Alaska (NSA) site at Utqiaġvik, Alaska. Statistically significant warming trends are found at the site in the boreal fall, while a decrease in net radiation occurs in late summer. This decrease is driven primarily by the decrease in shortwave radiation resulting from increasing cloud liquid water path as observed by the microwave radiometer. The magnitude of the liquid water path trends is slightly larger than the root mean square error (RMSE) due to natural variability, while the magnitude of the net radiation trends is smaller than the RMSE natural variability, emphasizing that these signals are only just emerging. Analysis of prevailing meteorological regimes linking NSA with the Arctic Ocean and subarctic latitudes, and atmospheric rivers, suggests that specific changing circulation patterns are the primary driver for these summertime trends.
Lubin, Dan [Univ. of California, San Diego, CA (Un↗
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↗
The Ecological Impacts of Dry and Hot Shocks in the Land of Midnight Sun
Contreras-Serrano et al. (2025) and Heinzelmann et al. (2025) investigated how droughts and heatwaves affect plant physiology and community functions in the Arctic. At first glance, such studies may seem counterintuitive. As the Earth's refrigerator, the Arctic is probably the least likely place that one might associate with droughts and heatwaves. However, dry and hot shocks do occur there, and their frequency and intensity can be surprisingly high. On June 20, 2020, the thermometer at the weather station of the Siberian town of Verkhoyansk (67.55° N and 133.40° E) witnessed a record temperature of 38°C in the Article Circle (Ciavarella et al. 2021). This record Arctic temperature was the consequence of the congruence of the powers of the stratospheric polar vortex, the tropospheric jet stream, and the Arctic Oscillation, all of which reached record strength in the early months of 2020, priming the conditions for an unprecedented ecological disturbance (Overland and Wang 2021). This extreme event, now known as the 2020 Siberian heatwave, caused widespread wildfires, insect outbreaks, and permafrost degradation, releasing almost 60 million tons of carbon into the atmosphere (ESOTC 2020). Extreme weather events like this are not just limited to Siberia (Dobricic et al. 2020). The Arctic has warmed up much faster than the rest of the world, that is, “Arctic Amplification” (Moon et al. 2024). The total land area affected by severe, extreme, and very extreme heatwaves has doubled, tripled, and quadrupled, respectively, across the terrestrial Arctic since the 1950s, and the extent is projected to continue increasing throughout the 21st century (Rantanen et al. 2024).
Arctic↗
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↗
Characteristics and effects of aerosols during blowing snow events in the central Arctic
Sea salt aerosol (SSaer) significantly impacts aerosol-radiation and aerosol-cloud interactions, and sublimated blowing snow is hypothesized to be an important SSaer source in polar regions. Understanding blowing snow and other wind-sourced aerosols’ climate relevant properties is needed, especially during winter when Arctic amplification is greatest. However, most of our understanding of blowing snow SSaer comes from modeling studies, and direct observations are sparse. Additionally, SSaer can originate from multiple sources, making it difficult to disentangle emission processes. Here, we present comprehensive observations of wind-sourced aerosol during blowing snow events from the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition in the central Arctic. High wind speed strongly enhances total aerosol number, submicron sodium chloride mass, cloud condensation nuclei concentrations, and scattering coefficients. Generally, the relative response of aerosol properties to wind speed enhancement is strongest in fall when Arctic aerosol concentrations are lowest. Blowing snow events showed similar aerosol and environmental properties across events, apart from occasions with high snow age (>6 days since last snowfall). Coarse-mode number concentrations (>1 μm) are better explained by variability in wind speed averaged over 12-h air mass back trajectories arriving at the MOSAiC site compared to local, instantaneous wind speed, suggesting the importance of regional transport and consideration of air mass history for wind-driven aerosol production. These MOSAiC observations provide new insights into wind-driven aerosol in the central Arctic and may help validate modeling studies and improve model parameterizations particularly for aerosol direct and indirect radiative forcing.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
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↗
Quantifying the impacts of atmospheric rivers on the surface energy budget of the Arctic based on reanalysis
We present a comprehensive analysis of Arctic surface energy budget (SEB) components during atmospheric river (AR) events identified by integrated water vapor transport exceeding the monthly 85th-percentile climatological threshold in 3-hourly ERA5 reanalysis data from January 1980 to December 2019. Analysis of average anomalies in SEB components, net SEB, and the overall AR contribution to both the seasonal SEB components and net SEB climatology reveals clear seasonality and distinct land–sea–sea ice contrast patterns. Over the sea-ice-covered central Arctic Ocean, ARs significantly impact net SEB, inducing substantial surface warming in fall, winter, and spring. This warming is primarily driven by large anomalies in surface downward longwave radiation (LWD), which average 29–45 W m −2 during the cold seasons. In contrast, AR-related LWD anomalies are smaller in summer, averaging around 15 W m −2 , indicating a reduced impact during this season. Over sub-polar oceans, ARs have the most substantial positive impact on net SEB in cold seasons, mainly attributed to significant positive turbulent heat flux anomalies. AR-related turbulent heat anomalies reduce the upward turbulent flux, contributing up to −11 % relative to its seasonal climatology. In summer, ARs induce negative impacts on net SEB, primarily due to reduced shortwave radiation from increased cloud cover during AR events. Over continents, ARs generate smaller absolute impacts on net SEB because the large LWD anomalies are largely offset by corresponding increases in upward longwave radiation, particularly during cold seasons. Additionally, the seemingly large relative contributions of ARs to the net SEB over land primarily reflects the small magnitude of the climatological net SEB over continents. Greenland, especially western Greenland, exhibits significant downward longwave radiation anomalies associated with ARs, which drive large net SEB anomalies and contribute >54 % to mean SEB and induce amplified surface warming year-round. This holds significance for melt events, particularly during summer. Additionally, results of AR-related SEB impacts strongly depend on detection methods, as restrictive AR detection algorithms that emphasize extreme AR events, with large AR-related anomalies, do not necessarily indicate a large overall contribution to the SEB climatology due to the low occurrence frequency of these events. This study quantifies the role of ARs in the surface energy budget, contributing to our understanding of the Arctic warming and sea ice decline in ongoing Arctic amplification.
Arctic Sea ice change↗
The two radiative states of the Arctic atmosphere and their impacts on the surface energy budget of sea ice
The surface energy budget (SEB) is a central regulator of Arctic climate and sea ice evolution, yet its processes remain poorly constrained due to sparse observations and complex, coupled surface-atmosphere interactions. This study leverages year-long measurements from the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) to provide the most comprehensive assessment to date of the central Arctic SEB and its modulation by atmospheric variability. Ship- and ice-based observations from October 2019 to September 2020 were used to directly measure or tightly constrain each term of the SEB, leading to exceptional energetic closure with the seasonal snow and ice mass balance. The analysis reveals strong seasonal transitions in atmosphere-surface energy transfer that are modulated by the atmospheric state and constrained by the ability of the surface temperature to respond. Classification of the atmosphere into its two dominant radiative states—the semi-transparent (ST) and opaque (OP)—highlights the central role of synoptic-scale variability in clouds. The ST atmospheric state dominated the long winter ice growth season, with limited cloudiness supporting persistent surface radiative cooling and ice growth. The OP state, associated with liquid-containing or thick ice clouds, became dominant in spring, with the combination of increased solar heating and cloud surface longwave warming driving ice and snow melt. Eddy covariance versus bulk approaches for deriving surface turbulent heat fluxes provide vastly different perspectives on the role of turbulence in modulating the SEB. These results establish a high-quality benchmark dataset for Arctic SEB studies and demonstrate how the balance of atmospheric radiative states exerts a first-order control on the annual evolution of the sea ice. The findings have broad implications for advancing observing technologies, understanding Arctic amplification, improving climate models, and predicting future sea ice change.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗