Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “CLIMATE MODELS”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2019

What Drives Upper-Ocean Temperature Variability in Coupled Climate Models and Observations?

Abstract A key question in climate modeling is to what extent sea surface temperature and upper-ocean heat content are driven passively by air–sea heat fluxes, as opposed to forcing by ocean dynamics. This paper investigates the question using a climate model at different resolutions, and observations, for monthly variability. At the grid scale in a high-resolution climate model with resolved mesoscale ocean eddies, ocean dynamics (i.e., ocean heat flux convergence) dominates upper 50 m heat content variability over most of the globe. For deeper depths of integration to 400 m, the heat content variability at the grid scale is almost totally controlled by ocean heat flux convergence. However, a strong dependence on spatial scale is found—for the upper 50 m of ocean, after smoothing the data to around 7°, air–sea heat fluxes, augmented by Ekman heat transports, dominate. For deeper depths of integration to 400 m, the transition scale becomes larger and is above 10° in western boundary currents. Comparison of climate model results with observations show that the small-scale influence of ocean intrinsic variability is well captured by the high-resolution model but is missing from a comparable model with parameterized ocean-eddy effects. In the deep tropics, ocean dynamics dominates in all cases and all scales. In the subtropical gyres at large scales, air–sea heat fluxes play the biggest role. In the midlatitudes, at large scales >10°, atmosphere-driven air–sea heat fluxes and Ekman heat transport variability are the dominant processes except in the western boundary currents for the 400 m heat content.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Linking Large-Scale Double-ITCZ Bias to Local-Scale Drizzling Bias in Climate Models

Tropical precipitation in climate models presents significant biases in both the large-scale pattern (i.e., double intertropical convergence zone bias) and local-scale characteristics (i.e., drizzling bias with too frequent drizzle/convection and reduced occurrences of no and heavy precipitation). By untangling the coupled system and analyzing the biases in precipitation, cloud, and radiation, this study shows that local-scale drizzling bias in atmospheric models can lead to large-scale double-ITCZ bias in coupled models by inducing convective-regime-dependent biases in precipitation and cloud radiative effects (CRE). The double-ITCZ bias consists of a hemispherically asymmetric component that arises from the asymmetric SST bias and a nearly symmetric component that exists in atmospheric models without the SST bias. By increasing light rain but reducing heavy rain, local-scale drizzling bias induces positive (negative) precipitation bias in the moderate (strong) convective regime, leading to the nearly symmetric wet bias in atmospheric models. By affecting the cloud profile, local-scale drizzling bias induces positive (negative) CRE bias in the stratocumulus (convective) regime in atmospheric models. Because the stratocumulus (convective) region is climatologically more pronounced in the southern (northern) tropics, the CRE bias is deemed to be hemispherically asymmetric and drives warm and wet (cold and dry) biases in the southern (northern) tropics when coupled to ocean. Our results suggest that correcting local-scale drizzling bias is critical for fixing large-scale double-ITCZ bias. Finally, the drizzling and double-ITCZ biases are not alleviated in models with mesoscale (0.25°–0.5°) or even storm-resolving (~3 km) resolution, implying that either large-eddy simulation or fundamental improvement in small-scale subgrid parameterizations is needed.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Uncertainty Quantification in Climate Modeling and Projection

The projection of future climate is one of the most complex problems undertaken by the scientific community. Although scientists have been striving to better understand the physical basis of the climate system and to improve climate models, the overall uncertainty in projections of future climate has not been significantly reduced (e.g., from the IPCC AR4 to AR5). With the rapid increase of complexity in Earth system models, reducing uncertainties in climate projections becomes extremely challenging. Since uncertainties always exist in climate models, interpreting the strengths and limitations of future climate projections is key to evaluating risks, and climate change information for use in Vulnerability, Impact, and Adaptation (VIA) studies should be provided with both well-characterized and well-quantified uncertainty. The workshop reported herein aimed at providing participants, many of them from developing countries, information on strategies to quantify the uncertainty in climate model projections and assess the reliability of climate change information for decision-making. The program included a mixture of lectures on fundamental concepts in Bayesian inference and sampling, applications, and hands-on computer laboratory exercises employing software packages for Bayesian inference, Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods, and global sensitivity analyses. The lectures covered a range of scientific issues underlying the evaluation of uncertainties in climate projections, such as the effects of uncertain initial and boundary conditions, uncertain physics, and limitations of observational records. Progress in quantitatively estimating uncertainties in hydrologic, land surface, and atmospheric models at both regional and global scales was also reviewed. The application of Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) concepts to coupled climate system models is still in its infancy. The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) multi-model ensemble currently represents the primary data for assessing reliability and uncertainties of climate change information. An alternative approach is to generate similar ensembles by perturbing parameters within a single-model framework. One of workshop’s objectives was to give participants a deeper understanding of these approaches within a Bayesian statistical framework. However, there remain significant challenges still to be resolved before UQ can be applied in a convincing way to climate models and their projections.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2019

A round Earth for climate models

Sunlight drives the Earth’s weather, climate, chemistry, and biosphere. Recent efforts to improve solar heating codes in climate models focused on more accurate treatment of the absorption spectrum or fractional clouds. A mostly forgotten assumption in climate models is that of a flat Earth atmosphere. Spherical atmospheres intercept 2.5 W·m −2 more sunlight and heat the climate by an additional 1.5 W⋅m −2 globally. Such a systematic shift, being comparable to the radiative forcing change from preindustrial to present, is likely to produce a discernible climate shift that would alter a model’s skill in simulating current climate. Regional heating errors, particularly at high latitudes, are several times larger. Unlike flat atmospheres, constituents in a spherical atmosphere, such as clouds and aerosols, alter the total amount of energy received by the Earth. To calculate the net cooling of aerosols in a spherical framework, one must count the increases in both incident and reflected sunlight, thus reducing the aerosol effect by 10 to 14% relative to using just the increase in reflected. Simple fixes to the current flat Earth climate models can correct much of this oversight, although some inconsistencies will remain.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

A Spatiotemporal-Aware Weighting Scheme for Improving Climate Model Ensemble Predictions

Multimodel ensembling has been widely used to improve climate model predictions, and the improvement strongly depends on the ensembling scheme. In this work, we propose a Bayesian neural network (BNN) ensembling method, which combines climate models within a Bayesian model averaging framework, to improve the predictive capability of model ensembles. Our proposed BNN approach calculates spatiotemporally varying model weights and biases by leveraging individual models' simulation skill, calibrates the ensemble prediction against observations by considering observation data uncertainty, and quantifies epistemic uncertainty when extrapolating to new conditions. More importantly, the BNN method provides interpretability about which climate model contributes more to the ensemble prediction at which locations and times. Thus, beyond its predictive capability, the method also brings insights and understanding of the models to guide further model and data development. In this study, we design experiments using an ensemble of CMIP6 climate model simulations to illustrate the BNN ensembling method's capability with respect to prediction accuracy, interpretability, and uncertainty quantification (UQ). We demonstrate that BNN can correctly assign larger weights to the regions and seasons where the individual model fits the observation better. Moreover, its offered interpretability is consistent with our understanding of localized climate model performance. Additionally, BNN shows an increasing uncertainty when the prediction is farther away from the period with constrained data, which appropriately reflects our trustworthiness of the models in the changing climate.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

gcm_eval (Global Climate Model Evaluation) [SWR-24-37]

The interplay between energy, climate, and weather is becoming more complex as our changing climate continues to affect the weather we experience which in turn drives changes in the ever increasing share of renewable energy generation and energy demand. Energy system analyses commonly rely on meteorological inputs to estimate renewable energy generation and energy demand; however, these inputs rarely represent the estimated impacts of future climate change. Climate models and publicly available climate change datasets can be used for this purpose, but the selection of inputs from the myriad of available models and datasets is a nuanced and often subjective process. There is no single perfect climate model or dataset for all applications. In this repository, we include software and the corresponding assessments of various global climate models (GCMs) from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), evaluating their skills with respect to the historical climate and comparing of their future projections of climate change. We focus on variables that directly affect the energy system including the representation of extreme values that can drive grid resilience events. The objective of this repository is not to recommend the best climate model and dataset for a given analysis, but instead to provide a reference to facilitate the selection of climate models and datasets in subsequent work.

Buster, Grant↗
DOE OSTI2024

Climate Model Output Rewriter

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

Mauzey, ChristopherF↗
DOE OSTI2016

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

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

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

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

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

Environmental sciences↗
DOE OSTI2017

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

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

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

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

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

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

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

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

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

Evaluation of Global Climate Models for Use in Energy Analysis

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

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Overcoming the disconnect between energy system and climate modeling

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

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2017

pyhector: A Python interface for the simple climate model Hector

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

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

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

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

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Pushing the frontiers in climate modelling and analysis with machine learning

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

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗