SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6)”

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 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2020

Fast Responses on Pre-Industrial Climate from Present-Day Aerosols in A CMIP6 Multi-Model Study

In this work, we use Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) simulations from 10 Earth system models (ESMs) and general circulation models (GCMs) to study the fast climate responses on pre-industrial climate, due to present-day aerosols. All models carried out two sets of simulations: a control experiment with all forcings set to the year 1850 and a perturbation experiment with all forcings identical to the control, except for aerosols with precursor emissions set to the year 2014. In response to the pattern of all aerosols effective radiative forcing (ERF), the fast temperature responses are characterized by cooling over the continental areas, especially in the Northern Hemisphere, with the largest cooling over East Asia and India, sulfate being the dominant aerosol surface temperature driver for present-day emissions. In the Arctic there is a warming signal for winter in the ensemble mean of fast temperature responses, but the model-to-model variability is large, and it is presumably linked to aerosol-induced circulation changes. The largest fast precipitation responses are seen in the tropical belt regions, generally characterized by a reduction over continental regions and presumably a southward shift of the tropical rain belt. This is a characteristic and robust feature among most models in this study, associated with weakening of the monsoon systems around the globe (Asia, Africa and America) in response to hemispherically asymmetric cooling from a Northern Hemisphere aerosol perturbation, forcing possibly the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) and tropical precipitation to shift away from the cooled hemisphere despite that aerosols' effects on temperature and precipitation are only partly realized in these simulations as the sea surface temperatures are kept fixed. An interesting feature in aerosol-induced circulation changes is a characteristic dipole pattern with intensification of the Icelandic Low and an anticyclonic anomaly over southeastern Europe, inducing warm air advection towards the northern polar latitudes in winter.

Pre-industrial climate↗

DOE OSTI2021

Coordinating an operational data distribution network for CMIP6 data

The distribution of data contributed to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) is via the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF). The ESGF is a network of internationally distributed sites that together work as a federated data archive. Data records from climate modelling institutes are published to the ESGF and then shared around the world. It is anticipated that CMIP6 will produce approximately 20 PB of data to be published and distributed via the ESGF. In addition to this large volume of data a number of value-added CMIP6 services are required to interact with the ESGF; for example the citation and errata services both interact with the ESGF but are not a core part of its infrastructure. With a number of interacting services and a large volume of data anticipated for CMIP6, the CMIP Data Node Operations Team (CDNOT) was formed. The CDNOT coordinated and implemented a series of CMIP6 preparation data challenges to test all the interacting components in the ESGF CMIP6 software ecosystem. This ensured that when CMIP6 data were released they could be reliably distributed.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2021

Assessing the Representation of Synoptic Variability Associated With California Extreme Precipitation in CMIP6 Models

Abstract Days of extreme precipitation over California are evaluated in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) models and the ERA‐Interim reanalysis. In the current climate, the model spread in composited precipitation on extreme precipitation days is closely related to the magnitude of composited integrated vapor transport (IVT) across models, a proxy for the intensity of atmospheric rivers. Most models underestimate the magnitude of IVT associated with extreme precipitation, according to ERA‐Interim. This is due mostly to the contribution of moisture, which almost all models overestimate, while the contribution of lower‐tropospheric wind speed is generally closer to the reanalyses. Moreover, most models underestimate the variance in the latitude of maxima of numerous variables among days of extreme California precipitation. That is, in the general circulation models there is a lack of diversity in the latitude of the disturbances bringing winter precipitation to California. In the future climate, most models project a decrease in the frequency of southward‐displaced disturbances among California extreme precipitation days. Hence, the greatest increases in extreme precipitation are over northern California. However, the historical underestimate of the latitudinal variance of disturbances calls into question the reliability of these projections. This bias should be especially considered for dynamical downscaling efforts over the region.

Norris, Jesse↗

DOE OSTI2020

The CMIP6 Data Request (DREQ, version 01.00.31)

The data request of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) defines all the quantities from CMIP6 simulations that should be archived. This includes both quantities of general interest needed from most of the CMIP6-endorsed model intercomparison projects (MIPs) and quantities that are more specialized and only of interest to a single endorsed MIP.The complexity of the data request has increased from the early days of model intercomparisons, as has the data volume.In contrast with CMIP5, CMIP6 requires distinct sets of highly tailored variables to be saved from each of the more than 200 experiments.This places new demands on the data request information base and leads to a new requirement for development of software that facilitates automated interrogation of the request and retrieval of its technical specifications.The building blocks and structure of the CMIP6 Data Request (DREQ), which have been constructed to meet these challenges, are described in this paper.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2022

Future Climate Change Under SSP Emission Scenarios with GISS-E2.1

This paper presents the response to anthropogenic forcing in the GISS-E2.1 climate models for the 21st century Shared Socioeconomic Pathways emission scenarios within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). The experiments were performed using an updated and improved version of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) coupled general circulation model that includes two different versions for atmospheric composition: A non-interactive version (NINT) with prescribed composition and a tuned aerosol indirect effect and the One-Moment Aerosol model (OMA) version with fully interactive aerosols which includes a parameterized first indirect aerosol effect on clouds. The effective climate sensitivities are 3.0°C and 2.9°C for the NINT and OMA models, respectively. Each atmospheric version is coupled to two different ocean general circulation models: The GISS ocean model (E2.1-G) and HYCOM (E2.1-H). We describe the global mean responses for all future scenarios and spatial patterns of change for surface air temperature and precipitation for four of the marker scenarios: SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP4-6.0, and SSP5-8.5. By 2100, global mean warming ranges from 1.5°C to 5.2°C relative to 1,850–1,880 mean temperature. Two high-mitigation scenarios SSP1-1.9 and SSP1-2.6 limit the surface warming to below 2°C by the end of the 21st century, except for the NINT E2.1-H model that simulates 2.2°C of surface warming. For the high emission scenario SSP5-8.5, the range is 4.6–5.2°C at 2100. Due to about 15% larger effective climate sensitivity and stronger transient climate response in both NINT and OMA CMIP6 models compared to CMIP5 versions, there is a stronger warming by 2100 in the SSP emission scenarios than in the comparable Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios in CMIP5. Changes in sea ice area are highly correlated to global mean surface air temperature anomalies and show steep declines in both hemispheres, with the largest sea ice area decreases occurring during September in the Northern Hemisphere in both E2.1-G (−1.21 × 106 km2/°C) and E2.1-H models (−0.94 × 106 km2/°C). Both coupled models project decreases in the Atlantic overturning stream function by 2100. The largest decrease of 56%–65% in the 21st century overturning stream function is produced in the warmest scenario SSP5-8.5 in the E2.1-G model, comparable to the reduction in the corresponding CMIP5 GISS-E2 RCP8.5 simulation. Both low-end scenarios SSP1-1.9 and SSP1-2.6 also simulate substantial reductions of the overturning (9%–37%) with slow recovery of about 10% by the end of the 21st century (relative to the maximum decrease at the middle of the 21st century).

climate models↗

DOE OSTI2020

Context for interpreting equilibrium climate sensitivity and transient climate response from the CMIP6 Earth system models

For the current generation of earth system models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6), the range of equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS, a hypothetical value of global warming at equilibrium for a doubling of CO 2 ) is 1.8°C to 5.6°C, the largest of any generation of models dating to the 1990s. Meanwhile, the range of transient climate response (TCR, the surface temperature warming around the time of CO 2 doubling in a 1% per year CO 2 increase simulation) for the CMIP6 models of 1.7°C (1.3°C to 3.0°C) is only slightly larger than for the CMIP3 and CMIP5 models. Here we review and synthesize the latest developments in ECS and TCR values in CMIP, compile possible reasons for the current values as supplied by the modeling groups, and highlight future directions. Cloud feedbacks and cloud-aerosol interactions are the most likely contributors to the high values and increased range of ECS in CMIP6.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Xanthos Output Dataset Under ISIMIP3b Selected CMIP6 Scenarios: 1850 - 2100

Overview Xanthos is an open-source hydrologic model, written in Python, designed to quantify and analyze global water availability. Xanthos simulates historical and future global water availability on a monthly time step at a spatial resolution of 0.5 geographic degrees. Xanthos was designed to be extensible and used by scientists that study global water supply and work with the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM). Details This dataset includes Xanthos outputs forced by the ISIMIP3b bias-adjusted CMIP6 climate forcing (1850 - 2100). There are 30 scenarios consists of 10 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) General Circulation Models (GCM) and 3 Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP). Each folder is named as cmip6_{gcm}_{ensemble-member}_{ssp}. 10 CMIP6 GCMs: GFDL-ESM4, IPSL-CM6A-LR, MPI-ESM1-2-HR, MRI-ESM2-0, UKESM1-0-LL, CanESM5, CNRM-CM6-1, CNRM-ESM2-1, EC-Earth3, and MIROC6 3 SSP-RCP Scenarios: SSP1-2.6, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5 The table below summarizes the details of output variables within each scenario folder. | Output Variable | File Short Name | Spatial Resolution | Unit | | ----------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------- | -------------------------------- | --------------------- | | Runoff | q | 0.5x0.5 degree | km3/month | | Runoff | Basin_runoff | GCAM basin | km3/month | | Runoff | Country_runoff | Country | km3/month | | Runoff | GCAMRegion_runoff | GCAM region | km3/month | | Streamflow | avgchflow | 0.5x0.5 degree | m3/second | | Potential Evapotranspiration | pet | 0.5x0.5 degree | km3/month | | Actual Evapotranspiration | aet | 0.5x0.5 degree | km3/month | | Accessible Water | accessible_water | GCAM basin | km3/year | | Hydropower Generation | actual_hydro | GCAM region | EJ/year |

Climate Change↗

DOE OSTI2023

Xanthos Output Dataset Under ISIMIP3b Selected CMIP6 Scenarios: 1850 - 2100

Climate Change↗

DOE OSTI2020

Evaluation of historical CMIP6 model simulations of extreme precipitation over contiguous US regions

Simulated historical precipitation is evaluated for Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) models using precipitation indices defined by the Expert Team on Climate Change Detection and Indices. The model indices are evaluated against corresponding indices from the CPC unified gauge-based analyses of precipitation over seven geographical regions across the contiguous US (CONUS). The regions assessed match those in recent US National Climate Assessment Reports. To estimate observational uncertainty, precipitation indices for three other observational datasets (HadEx2, Livneh and PRISM) are evaluated against the CPC analyses. Both the moderate and extreme mean precipitation intensities are overestimated over the western CONUS and underestimated in the areas of the Central Great Plains (CGP) in most CMIP6 models tested. Most CMIP6 models overestimate the mean and variability of wet spell durations and underestimate the mean and variability of dry spell durations across the CONUS. Biases in interannual variability of most of the indices have similar patterns to those in corresponding mean biases. The median and interquartile model spreads in CMIP6 model biases are clearly smaller than those in CMIP5 model biases for wet spell durations. Multimodel medians of CMIP6 (CMIP6-MMM) and CMIP5 (CMIP5-MMM) have similar biases in climatology and variability but biases tend to be smaller in CMIP6-MMM. Depending on the index, extreme precipitation is slightly better in parts of the eastern half of the CONUS in CMIP6-MMM, otherwise, the biases in climatology and variability are similar to CMIP5-MMM. CMIP6-MMM performs better than individual models and even observational datasets in some cases. Differences between observational datasets for most indices are comparable to the CMIP6 interquartile model spread. The better-performing observational and model datasets are different in different parts of the CONUS.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

DOE OSTI2020

The Global‐Mean Precipitation Response to CO 2 ‐Induced Warming in CMIP6 Models

Abstract We examine the response of globally averaged precipitation to global warming—the hydrologic sensitivity (HS)—in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) multi‐model ensemble. Multi‐model mean HS is 2.5% K −1 (ranging from 2.1–3.1% K −1 across models), a modest decrease compared to CMIP5 (where it was 2.6% K −1 ). This new set of simulations is used as an out‐of‐sample test for observational constraints on HS proposed based on CMIP5. The constraint based on clear‐sky shortwave absorption sensitivity to water vapor has weakened, and it is argued that a proposed constraint based on surface low cloud longwave radiative effects does not apply to HS. Finally, while a previously proposed mechanism connecting HS and climate sensitivity via low clouds is present in the CMIP6 ensemble, it is not an important factor for variations in HS. This explains why HS is uncorrelated with climate sensitivity across the CMIP5 and CMIP6 ensembles.

Pendergrass, A. G.↗

NASA NTRS2023

Comment on “Advanced Testing of Low, Medium, and High ECS CMIP6 GCM Simulations Versus ERA5-T2m” by N. Scafetta (2022)

Scafetta (2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022gl097716) purports to test Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) climate models through a comparison of temperature changes over three decades. Unfortunately, the paper contains numerous conceptual and statistical errors that undermine all of the conclusions. First, no uncertainty is given for the observational temperature difference, making it impossible to assess compatibility with any model result. Second, the CMIP6 data are the ensemble means for each model, but the metric being tested is sensitive to the internal variability and so the full ensemble for each model must be used. When this is corrected, the conclusion that “all models with ECS > 3.0°C overestimate the observed global surface warming” is not sustained. Third, the statistical test in Section 2 would reject all models even in a perfect model setup given sufficient ensemble members, thus the second conclusion “that spatial t-statistics rejects the data-model agreement” is also not sustainable.

CMIP6↗

NASA NTRS2022

Understanding Model-Observation Discrepancies in Satellite Retrievals of Atmospheric Temperature Using GISS ModelE

We examine multiple factors in the representation of satellite-retrieved atmospheric temperature diagnostics in historical simulations of climate change during the satellite era (specifically 1979–2021) using GISS ModelE contributions to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (Phase 6) (CMIP6). The tropospheric and stratospheric trends in these diagnostics are affected by greenhouse gases (notably carbon dioxide and ozone), coupling with the ocean, volcanic aerosols, solar activity and compositional and dynamic feedbacks. We explore the impacts of internal variability, changing forcing specifications, composition interactivity, the quality of the stratospheric circulation, vertical resolution, and possible impacts of the mis-specification of volcanic aerosol optical depths. Overall temperature trends throughout the satellite period are well captured, but discrepancies at all levels exist and have multiple distinct causes. We find that stratospheric comparisons (using Stratospheric Sounding Unit (SSU) retrievals and successor instruments) are most affected by variations in the representation of ozone depletion and feedbacks, followed by the volcanic signals. Tropospheric skill (using the Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) retrievals) is affected by the trends in ocean heat uptake and tropospheric aerosols, but also by the representation of stratospheric processes through the impact of the Brewer-Dobson circulation on the height of the tropical tropopause. We demonstrate that no single factor is the dominant cause of the discrepancies and that almost all observations lie within the broad envelope of structural uncertainty.

satellite retrievals of atmospheric temperature↗

DOE OSTI2024

Global Corn Heat Stress: Mean and SD of Degree Days Above 29°C based on NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 Climate Projections

Description This global dataset provides the estimated mean and standard deviation (SD) of corn heat stress (degree days above 29°C) for a set of climate models in NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 at 0.25-degree resolution. The NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 dataset is comprised of global downscaled climate scenarios derived from the General Circulation Model (GCM) runs conducted under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). The current dataset includes: Long-Term Average Degree Days Above 29°C- Historical Long-Term Average Degree Days Above 29°C- SSP245 Long-Term Standard Deviation of Degree Days Above 29°C- Historical Long-Term Standard Deviation of Degree Days Above 29°C- SSP245 The mean and SD are calculated over 1985-2014 for the historical period and over 2035-2064 for future projections. A full description of methods, including growing season, daily temperature distribution, and statistical coefficients, can be found in Haqiqi (2024). The source climate data are obtained from https://ds.nccs.nasa.gov/thredds2/catalog/catalog.html and are described in Thrasher et al (2022). The codes used to create this dataset are available at https://github.com/ihaqiqi/dd29c_nex_cmip6. Acknowledgments This work was supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research Program, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling, MultiSector Dynamics under Cooperative Agreement DE-SC0022141. The data processing, computation, and storage were completed on Purdue Anvil supercomputer and cyberinfrastructure supported by the National Science Foundation HDR award # 2118329: "NSF Institute for Geospatial Understanding through an Integrative Discovery Environment (I-GUIDE)". References Haqiqi. I. (2024). Trade can buffer climate-induced risks and volatilities in crop supply. Environmental Research: Food Systems. https://doi.org/10.1088/2976-601X/ad7d12 Thrasher, B., Wang, W., Michaelis, A., Melton, F., Lee, T., & Nemani, R. (2022). NASA global daily downscaled projections, CMIP6. Scientific Data, 9(1), 262. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01393-4

Climate Change↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Earth Exchange – Current overview of climate and wildfire-oriented works

NASA Earth Exchange (NEX) combines state-of-the-art supercomputing, Earth system modeling, and NASA remote sensing data feeds to deliver a work environment for exploring and analyzing petabyte-scale datasets covering large regions, continents, or the globe. As an accessible platform, NEX can accelerate fundamental research, develop new applications, and reduce overall project costs by providing the research community with data, software, and high-end computing power. Two research thrusts for the NEX community are developing and distributing the NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 downscaled climate dataset and the community-driven wildfire research. NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 dataset is comprised of global downscaled climate scenarios derived from the General Circulation Model (GCM) runs conducted under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) and across two of the four “Tier 1” greenhouse gas emissions scenarios known as Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). The wildfire research thrust leverages geostationary and low earth orbit remote sensing platforms and advanced modeling (WRF). We present a high-level overview of the NEX community, discuss relevant datasets and show several visualization techniques of data used in the wildfire research activity.

NEX↗

DOE OSTI2024

Concurrent Inter-Model Spread of Boreal Winter Westerly Jet Meridional Positions Between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres in CMIP6 Models

Here, this study investigates the inter-model spread of climatological extratropical westerly jets in boreal winter, using the historical simulation of 52 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) models from 1851 to 2014. The results show that there is a substantial spread in the latitude of the upper-tropospheric westerly jet across models, characterised by large inter-model standard deviations to both the poleward and equatorward sides of the jet axis, although the multi-model ensemble mean (MME) performs well in simulating meridional position of westerly jets. Furthermore, we detect the consistency of inter-model jet position spread between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, based on the inter-model empirical orthogonal function (EOF) decomposition and correlation of regional-averaged zonal winds. Specifically, the models that simulate the westerly jets poleward/equatorward relative to the MME position in one hemisphere also tend to simulate the jets poleward/equatorward in the other hemisphere. Accordingly, we define a global jet spread index to depict the concurrence of jet shift in the two hemispheres. The results of inter-model regression analyses based on this index indicate that the models positioning the jets poleward than the MME tend to simulate a wider Hadley Cell, a poleward-shifted Ferrel Cell in the Southern Hemisphere, enhanced precipitation in the subtropics and suppressed precipitation in the tropics, and warmer sea surface temperatures in the subtropics and mid-latitudes. The present results suggest that improving the simulation of jet positions in climate models requires a comprehensive consideration of thermal states in the tropics and subtropics/mid latitudes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Assessment of CMIP6 Performance and Projected Temperature and Precipitation Changes Over South America

We evaluate the performance of a large ensemble of Global Climate Models (GCMs) from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) over South America for a recent past reference period and examine their projections of twenty-first century precipitation and temperature changes. The future changes are computed for two time slices (2040–2059 and 2080–2099) relative to the reference period (1995–2014) under four Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs, SSP1–2.6, SSP2–4.5, SSP3–7.0 and SSP5–8.5). The CMIP6 GCMs successfully capture the main climate characteristics across South America. However, they exhibit varying skill in the spatiotemporal distribution of precipitation and temperature at the sub-regional scale, particularly over high latitudes and altitudes. Future precipitation exhibits a decrease over the east of the northern Andes in tropical South America and the southern Andes in Chile and Amazonia, and an increase over southeastern South America and the northern Andes—a result generally consistent with earlier CMIP (3 and 5) projections. However, most of these changes remain within the range of variability of the reference period. In contrast, temperature increases are robust in terms of magnitude even under the SSP1–2.6. Future changes mostly progress monotonically from the weakest to the strongest forcing scenario, and from the mid-century to late-century projection period. There is an increase in the seasonality of the intra-annual precipitation distribution, as the wetter part of the year contributes relatively more to the annual total. Furthermore, an increasingly heavy-tailed precipitation distribution and a rightward shifted temperature distribution provide strong indications of a more intense hydrological cycle as greenhouse gas emissions increase. The relative distance of an individual GCM from the ensemble mean does not substantially vary across different scenarios. We found no clear systematic linkage between model spread about the mean in the reference period and the magnitude of simulated sub-regional climate change in the future period. Overall, these results could be useful for regional climate change impact assessments across South America.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Contributions to Polar Amplification in CMIP5 and CMIP6 Models

As a step towards understanding the fundamental drivers of polar climate change, we evaluate contributions to polar warming and its seasonal and hemispheric asymmetries in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) as compared with CMIP5. CMIP6 models broadly capture the observed pattern of surface- and winter-dominated Arctic warming that has outpaced both tropical and Antarctic warming in recent decades. For both CMIP5 and CMIP6, CO 2 quadrupling experiments reveal that the lapse-rate and surface albedo feedbacks contribute most to stronger warming in the Arctic than the tropics or Antarctic. The relative strength of the polar surface albedo feedback in comparison to the lapse-rate feedback is sensitive to the choice of radiative kernel, and the albedo feedback contributes most to intermodel spread in polar warming at both poles. By separately calculating moist and dry atmospheric heat transport, we show that increased poleward moisture transport is another important driver of Arctic amplification and the largest contributor to projected Antarctic warming. Seasonal ocean heat storage and winter-amplified temperature feedbacks contribute most to the winter peak in warming in the Arctic and a weaker winter peak in the Antarctic. In comparison with CMIP5, stronger polar warming in CMIP6 results from a larger surface albedo feedback at both poles, combined with less-negative cloud feedbacks in the Arctic and increased poleward moisture transport in the Antarctic. However, normalizing by the global-mean surface warming yields a similar degree of Arctic amplification and only slightly increased Antarctic amplification in CMIP6 compared to CMIP5.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Global and northern-high-latitude net ecosystem production in the 21st century from CMIP6 experiments

Climate warming is accelerating the changes in the global terrestrial ecosystems and particularly those in the northern high latitudes (NHLs; poleward of 50° N) and rendering the land–atmosphere carbon exchange highly uncertain. The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) employs the most updated climate models to estimate terrestrial ecosystem carbon dynamics driven by a new set of socioeconomic and climate change pathways. By analyzing the future (2015–2100) carbon fluxes estimated by 10 CMIP6 models, we quantitatively evaluated the projected magnitudes, trends, and uncertainties in the global and NHL carbon fluxes under four scenarios plus the role of NHLs in the global terrestrial ecosystem carbon dynamics. Overall, the models suggest that the global and NHL terrestrial ecosystems will be consistent carbon sinks in the future, and the magnitude of the carbon sinks is projected to be larger under scenarios with higher radiative forcing. By the end of this century, the models on average estimate the NHL net ecosystem productivity (NEP) as 0.54 ± 0.77, 1.01 ± 0.98, 0.97 ± 1.62, and 1.05 ± 1.83 Pg C yr –1 under SSP126, SSP245, SSP370, and SSP585, respectively. The uncertainties are not substantially reduced compared with earlier results, e.g., the Coupled Climate–Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison Project (C4MIP). Although NHLs contribute a small fraction of the global carbon sink (~13 %), the relative uncertainties in NHL NEP are much larger than the global level. Our results provide insights into future carbon flux evolutions under future scenarios and highlight the urgent need to constrain the large uncertainties associated with model projections for making better climate mitigation strategies.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗