SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Arctic”

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 91 records · Page 5

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2020

Evaluation of Arctic Warming in Mid-Pliocene Climate Simulations

Palaeoclimate simulations improve our understanding of the climate, inform us about the performance of climate models in a different climate scenario, and help to identify robust features of the climate system. Here, we analyse Arctic warming in an ensemble of 16 simulations of the mid-Pliocene Warm Period (mPWP), derived from the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project Phase 2 (PlioMIP2). The PlioMIP2 ensemble simulates Arctic (60–90∘ N) annual mean surface air temperature (SAT) increases of 3.7 to 11.6 ∘C compared to the pre-industrial period, with a multi-model mean (MMM) increase of 7.2 ∘C. The Arctic warming amplification ratio relative to global SAT anomalies in the ensemble ranges from 1.8 to 3.1 (MMM is 2.3). Sea ice extent anomalies range from −3.0 to −10.4×106 km2, with a MMM anomaly of −5.6×106 km2, which constitutes a decrease of 53 % compared to the pre-industrial period. The majority (11 out of 16) of models simulate summer sea-ice-free conditions (≤1×106 km2) in their mPWP simulation. The ensemble tends to underestimate SAT in the Arctic when compared to available reconstructions, although the degree of underestimation varies strongly between the simulations. The simulations with the highest Arctic SAT anomalies tend to match the proxy dataset in its current form better. The ensemble shows some agreement with reconstructions of sea ice, particularly with regard to seasonal sea ice. Large uncertainties limit the confidence that can be placed in the findings and the compatibility of the different proxy datasets. We show that while reducing uncertainties in the reconstructions could decrease the SAT data–model discord substantially, further improvements are likely to be found in enhanced boundary conditions or model physics. Lastly, we compare the Arctic warming in the mPWP to projections of future Arctic warming and find that the PlioMIP2 ensemble simulates greater Arctic amplification than CMIP5 future climate simulations and an increase instead of a decrease in Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) strength compared to pre-industrial period. The results highlight the importance of slow feedbacks in equilibrium climate simulations, and that caution must be taken when using simulations of the mPWP as an analogue for future climate change.

Palaeoclimate simulations↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Quantifying Changes in the Arctic Shortwave Cloud Radiative Effects

The shortwave cloud radiative effect (SWCRE) is important on the Arctic surface radiation budget and the major source of inter-model spread in predictions of Arctic climate. To better understand the individual contributions of various radiative processes to changes in SWCRE, the paper presents the use of the extended APRP (Atmospheric Radiative Perturbation Potential) method. This involves adding the absorptivity for the upward beam and considering differences in reflectivity between upward and downward beams, as well as analyzing the cloud masking effect resulting from changes in surface albedo in more detail. Using data from the CMIP5 and CMIP6 climate models, the study decomposes the SWCRE over the Arctic surface and analyzes inter-model differences in quadrupled CO2 simulations. The study takes into account the fact that the response of SWCRE to Arctic warming is influenced by changes in surface albedo, cloud amount, and cloud microphysics. Results show that in the sunlight season, the reduction in surface albedo associated with sea ice loss is directly linked to strong negative SWCRE, which explains the considerable model discrepancy. Arctic clouds can hinder the positive surface albedo feedback by changing the albedo in two ways: (1) decreasing incoming shortwave radiation due to cloud reflection and (2) by decreasing the shortwave reaching the surface after being reflected by clouds. In addition, increased (decreased) cloud amount and cloud liquid water are shown to be less (more) incoming shortwave fluxes at the surface, but not dominating factors to the Arctic surface radiation budget and its inter-model variation. Overall, the extended APRP method offers a useful tool for analyzing the complex interactions between clouds and radiative process, reasonably decomposes the individual SWCRE responses at the Arctic surface, and emphasizes that considering not only the cloud amount or its properties, but also surface albedo change is critical for the prediction of SWCRE on the Arctic surface.

Arctic cloud↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Anthropogenic Pathways for Modeling and Managing Future Arctic Fires

Wildland fires, including extreme fire events and seasons, are becoming more common in the boreal and Arctic regions due to climate change. Current climate modeling approaches do not include country- or region-specific socioeconomic pathways that specifically address the drivers of and potential mitigation techniques for wildland fires. Forest management, energy extraction, and tourism, together with firefighting capacity and readiness as well as fuels treatment, can have a significant impact on future wildland fire risks and impacts. To assess the impacts of anthropogenic factors and to align with previous work done on shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs), climate pathways for future wildfires up to 2050 were created for the states that compose the original Arctic Council countries: Canada, the United States, the Kingdom of Denmark, Iceland, Sweden, Norway, and Finland as well as the Russian Federation (with whom the other seven countries withdrew participation from in May 2022 due to the invasion and ongoing war in Ukraine). High and low fire activity and risk pathways for all states comprising the Arctic were made, with expert ‘best guess’ pathways for each state created separately to represent the middle of road. The low activity and low fire risk pathways, named “We Got This”, assume active fire suppression via citizenry participation and official land management, efficient and extensive fuel treatments, and consistent and active wildland firefighting for each new ignition. The high activity and high fire risk pathways, named “Let It Burn”, assume nearly the opposite, due to lack of government and community response and no action on climate change drivers that increase wildland fire risk. The ‘best guess’ pathway, named “The Fire Will Come”, indicates that some countries are currently on the pathway for less fire compared to other Arctic and Boreal states but not a ‘no-fire’ future. For example, in the Nordic countries, human ignition sources from tourism, timber and energy extraction, summer cottages, and expanding wildland-urban intermix due to exurban growth may increase. In North America, these same risks will apply but also may see an expansion of agriculture that increases the likelihood of open burning in croplands. Drier fuel condition and extreme heat events due to climate change create favorable conditions for extreme wildfires from any ignition source. Throughout the Arctic and boreal lightning is expected to increase, increasing the risk of tundra fires in addition to forest fires in hard-to-reach locations that are more difficult to coordinate and execute wildland firefighting. To move the future Arctic fire SSPs forward, several short-term and long-term actions must be completed. Certain data needs are required, like a harmonized pan-Arctic and pan-boreal fuels geospatial product, while also a need to refine and socialize current definitions of fire seasons and fire management – including developing an open-source system to track and share innovation, mitigation, and adaptation strategies across Arctic states.

Arctic↗

DOE OSTI2025

Arctic extreme precipitation changes from 1980 to 2022 in response to sea ice decline and enhanced atmospheric rivers

Arctic extreme precipitation (EP) broadly impacts permafrost degradation, glacier and snow cover changes, and ice sheet mass balance as well as ecosystems. However, investigation of EP spatiotemporal variations over the Arctic remains challenging, and their primary drivers are still poorly understood. Performance estimation of three state-of-the-art reanalysis products (Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR), European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Reanalysis version 5 (ERA-5), and Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, version 2 (MERRA-2)) against gauge-based precipitation observations reveals that MERRA-2 outperforms other reanalysis for Arctic EP changes. Based on MERRA-2 data, both annual EP amount and occurrence days averaged over the Arctic show statistically significant positive trends during 1980–2022 (3.37 ± 1.03 mm dec −1 and 0.42 ± 0.17 d dec −1 , respectively), with the most pronounced increase in the autumn. Spatial heterogeneity in annual and seasonal EP trends is found across the Arctic, with the largest positive annual trends of 30 mm dec −1 over the Bering Sea and the Denmark Strait. The significant EP increase is closely associated with intensified atmospheric rivers (ARs) and widespread decline in sea ice concentration (SIC). Specially, SIC and ARs are responsible for 12% and 50% of Arctic EP inter-annual variance, respectively, while ARs directly contribute 28.3% of the total annual EP amounts. These findings explain the mechanistic controls on Arctic EP, providing critical insights for projecting polar weather and climate extremes and their impacts on the Arctic environment.

atmospheric rivers↗

DOE OSTI2024

NGEE Arctic 2019 Alder Ground Truth Survey, Seward Peninsula AK

In July 2019 we made traveled the road system outside of Nome, AK and detailed the GPS coordinates of alder shrublands for the purpose of ground-truthing alder maps of the region. Both visual and ground-based observations were made for patches of alder shrublands greater 5x5m and larger, ideally 10x10m. Visual observations were made from the car and GPS coordinates are approximate, placed by dropping pins on georeferenced pdfs using the Avenza app. Visual observations included positive identified alder shrublands as well as thickets of non-alder shrubs. Ground Observations were made at a subset of locations where we were able to hike to alders shrubland areas. Ground observations include GPS points (made with Garmin InReach) as well as relevant features of a centrally located, representative alder shrub in the patch (max height, basal diameter of all ramets, soil depth). Aboveground biomass (weight dry mass) of the surveyed shrub was calculated based on alder-specific allometric equations in Berner et al 2015 which our team checked for accuracy for the Seward Peninsula as part of Salmon et al 2019. This dataset contains three data files, three data dictionaries, and one file-level metadata file all in*.csv format plus one *.txt README file. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

NGEE Arctic Tram: Radiation and Environmental Measurements over Low- and High-Centered Polygon Vegetation Communities, Barrow, Alaska, 2014-2017

These data were generated from an observational platform (Tram), an automated cart carrying a suite of radiation and remote sensing instruments running on 68 meters of elevated track 1 to 1.5 meters above the surface of the vegetation communities of low- and high-centered polygon ground. The Tram is in the footprint of the NGEE Arctic/AmeriFlux eddy covariance flux tower (US-NGB) at the Barrow Environmental Observatory, Barrow, Alaska, and operated before, during, and after the growing seasons of 2014-2017. Dataset includes one user guide (*.pdf) with final and raw *.csv data files. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS1998

Cloud-Scale Numerical Modeling of the Arctic Boundary Layer

The interactions between sea ice, open ocean, atmospheric radiation, and clouds over the Arctic Ocean exert a strong influence on global climate. Uncertainties in the formulation of interactive air-sea-ice processes in global climate models (GCMs) result in large differences between the Arctic, and global, climates simulated by different models. Arctic stratus clouds are not well-simulated by GCMs, yet exert a strong influence on the surface energy budget of the Arctic. Leads (channels of open water in sea ice) have significant impacts on the large-scale budgets during the Arctic winter, when they contribute about 50 percent of the surface fluxes over the Arctic Ocean, but cover only 1 to 2 percent of its area. Convective plumes generated by wide leads may penetrate the surface inversion and produce condensate that spreads up to 250 km downwind of the lead, and may significantly affect the longwave radiative fluxes at the surface and thereby the sea ice thickness. The effects of leads and boundary layer clouds must be accurately represented in climate models to allow possible feedbacks between them and the sea ice thickness. The FIRE III Arctic boundary layer clouds field program, in conjunction with the SHEBA ice camp and the ARM North Slope of Alaska and Adjacent Arctic Ocean site, will offer an unprecedented opportunity to greatly improve our ability to parameterize the important effects of leads and boundary layer clouds in GCMs.

Krueger, Steven K.↗

NASA NTRS2003

Fresh Water Content Variability in the Arctic Ocean

Arctic Ocean model simulations have revealed that the Arctic Ocean has a basin wide oscillation with cyclonic and anticyclonic circulation anomalies (Arctic Ocean Oscillation; AOO) which has a prominent decadal variability. This study explores how the simulated AOO affects the Arctic Ocean stratification and its relationship to the sea ice cover variations. The simulation uses the Princeton Ocean Model coupled to sea ice. The surface forcing is based on NCEP-NCAR Reanalysis and its climatology, of which the latter is used to force the model spin-up phase. Our focus is to investigate the competition between ocean dynamics and ice formation/melt on the Arctic basin-wide fresh water balance. We find that changes in the Atlantic water inflow can explain almost all of the simulated fresh water anomalies in the main Arctic basin. The Atlantic water inflow anomalies are an essential part of AOO, which is the wind driven barotropic response to the Arctic Oscillation (AO). The baroclinic response to AO, such as Ekman pumping in the Beaufort Gyre, and ice meldfreeze anomalies in response to AO are less significant considering the whole Arctic fresh water balance.

Hakkinen, Sirpa↗

NASA NTRS2005

Arctic Warming Signals from Satellite Observations

Global warming signals are expected to be amplified in the Arctic primarily because of ice-albedo feedback associated with the high reflectivity of ice and snow that blankets much of the region. The Arctic had been a poorly explored territory basically because of its general inaccessibility on account of extremely harsh weather conditions and the dominant presence of thick perennial ice in the region. The advent of satellite remote sensing systems since the 1960s, however, enabled the acquisition of synoptic data that depict in good spatial detail the temporal changes of many Arctic surface parameters. Among the surface parameters that have been studied using space based systems are surface temperature, sea ice concentration, snow cover, surface albedo and phytoplankton concentration. Associated atmospheric parameters, such as cloud cover, temperature profile, ozone concentration, and aerosol have also been derived. Recent observational and phenomenological studies have indeed revealed progressively changing conditions in the Arctic during the last few decades (e g , Walsh et al. 1996; Serreze et al 2000; Comiso and Parkinson 2004). The changes included declines in the extent and area of surfaces covered by sea ice and snow, increases in melt area over the Greenland ice sheets, thawing of the permafrost, warming in the troposphere, and retreat of the glaciers. These observations are consistent with the observed global warming that has been associated with the increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (Karl and Trenberth 2003) and confirmed by modeling studies (Holland and Bitz, 2003). The Arctic system, however, is still not well understood complicated by a largely fluctuating wind circulation and atmospheric conditions (Proshutinsky and Johnson 1997) and controlled by what is now known as the Arctic Oscillation (AO) which provides a measure of the strength of atmospheric activities in the region (Thompson and Wallace 1998). Meanwhile, the observed Arctic conditions since the 1970s have been shown to exhibit a linear behavior that directly contradicts what has been expected from the A0 (Overland, 2005). The decade of the 1990s has been regarded as the warmest decade in the last century and current data indicates that the 2000s may be even a warmer decade than the 1990s further supporting the linear variability. In this paper, we use satellite data to gain insights into the warming Arctic and how the abnormally warm conditions during the last few years are reflected in the region.

Comiso, Josefino C.↗

NASA NTRS2018

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↗

NASA NTRS2022

Constraining Arctic Climate Projections of Wintertime Warming With Surface Turbulent Flux Observations and Representation of Surface-Atmosphere Coupling

The drivers of rapid Arctic climate change—record sea ice loss, warming SSTs, and a lengthening of the sea ice melt season—compel us to understand how this complex system operates and use this knowledge to enhance Arctic predictability. Changing energy flows sparked by sea ice decline, spotlight atmosphere-surface coupling processes as central to Arctic system function and its climate change response. Despite this, the representation of surface turbulent flux parameterizations in models has not kept pace with our understanding. The large uncertainty in Arctic climate change projections, the central role of atmosphere-surface coupling, and the large discrepancy in model representation of surface turbulent fluxes indicates that these processes may serve as useful observational constraints on projected Arctic climate change. This possibility requires an evaluation of surface turbulent fluxes and their sensitivity to controlling factors (surface-air temperature and moisture differences, sea ice, and winds) within contemporary climate models (here Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6). The influence of individual controlling factors and their interactions is diagnosed using a multi-linear regression approach. This evaluation is done for four sea ice loss regimes, determined from observational sea ice loss trends, to control for the confounding effects of natural variability between models and observations. The comparisons between satellite- and model-derived surface turbulent fluxes illustrate that while models capture the general sensitivity of surface turbulent fluxes to declining sea ice and to surface-air gradients of temperature and moisture, substantial mean state biases exist. Specifically, the central Arctic is too weak of a heat sink to the winter atmosphere compared to observations, with implications to the simulated atmospheric circulation variability and thermodynamic profiles. Models were found to be about 50% more efficient at turning an air-sea temperature gradient anomaly into a sensible heat flux anomaly relative to observations. Further, the influence of sea ice concentration on the sensible heat flux is underestimated in models compared to observations. The opposite is found for the latent heat flux variability in models; where the latent heat flux is too sensitive to a sea ice concentration anomaly. Lastly, the results suggest that present-day trends in sea ice retreat regions may serve as suitable observational constraints of projected Arctic warming.

turbulent fluxes↗

NASA NTRS2022

Model Evaluation of Short-Lived Climate Forcers for the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme: A Multi-Species, Multi-Model Study

While carbon dioxide is the main cause for global warming, modeling short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs) such as methane, ozone, and particles in the Arctic allows us to simulate near-term climate and health impacts for a sensitive, pristine region that is warming at 3 times the global rate. Atmospheric modeling is critical for understanding the long-range transport of pollutants to the Arctic, as well as the abundance and distribution of SLCFs throughout the Arctic atmosphere. Modeling is also used as a tool to determine SLCF impacts on climate and health in the present and in future emissions scenarios. In this study, we evaluate 18 state-of-the-art atmospheric and Earth system models by assessing their representation of Arctic and Northern Hemisphere atmospheric SLCF distributions, considering a wide range of different chemical species (methane, tropospheric ozone and its precursors, black carbon, sulfate, organic aerosol, and particulate matter) and multiple observational datasets. Model simulations over 4 years (2008-2009 and 2014-2015) conducted for the 2022 Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) SLCF assessment report are thoroughly evaluated against satellite, ground, ship, and aircraft-based observations. The annual means, seasonal cycles, and 3-D distributions of SLCFs were evaluated using several metrics, such as absolute and percent model biases and correlation coefficients. The results show a large range in model performance, with no one particular model or model type performing well for all regions and all SLCF species. The multi-model mean (mmm) was able to represent the general features of SLCFs in the Arctic and had the best overall performance. For the SLCFs with the greatest radiative impact (CH4, 03, BC, and SO(sup 2-)(sub 4)), the mmm was within ±25 % of the measurements across the Northern Hemisphere. Therefore, we recommend a multi-model ensemble be used for simulating climate and health impacts of SLCFs. Of the SLCFs in our study, model biases were smallest for C"4 and greatest for OA. For most SLCFs, model biases skewed from positive to negative with increasing latitude. Our analysis suggests that vertical mixing, long-range transport, deposition, and wildfires remain highly uncertain processes. These processes need better representation within atmospheric models to improve their simulation of SLCFs in the Arctic environment. As model development proceeds in these areas, we highly recommend that the vertical and 3-D distribution of SLCFs be evaluated, as that information is critical to improving the uncertain processes in models.

Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme↗

DOE OSTI2025

The Arctic

The Arctic environment in 2024 continued on a trajectory that has put it in a state far different from that of the twentieth century. Ongoing accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continues to quickly warm the Arctic, resulting in rapid changes in the cryosphere that are driving cascading impacts to climate, ecological, and societal systems. Many weather- and climate-related impacts in the Arctic are the result of compounding change, such as increased riverbank erosion, which is proximately due to increased river discharge from higher seasonal precipitation, yet is also exacerbated by thawing permafrost. However, even individual storms occur within very different ocean and ice conditions than were typically present in the late twentieth century. As a result, the impacts, including high winds, excessive precipitation, and coastal inundation, may be quite different nowadays, as exemplified by the October 2024 storm in northwest Alaska that produced severe coastal flooding in several communities. To share some of these impacts with a wider audience, select extreme weather impacts around the greater Arctic have been highlighted through the inclusion of sidebars in recent State of the Climate Arctic chapters (e.g., Benestad et al. 2023; Thoman et al. 2024).

Thoman, Richard L. [Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK↗

DOE OSTI2025

Next generation Arctic vegetation maps: Aboveground plant biomass and woody dominance mapped at 30 m resolution across the tundra biome

The Arctic is warming faster than anywhere else on Earth, placing tundra ecosystems at the forefront of global climate change. Plant biomass is a fundamental ecosystem attribute that is sensitive to changes in climate, closely tied to ecological function, and crucial for constraining ecosystem carbon dynamics. However, the amount, functional composition, and distribution of plant biomass are only coarsely quantified across the Arctic. Therefore, we developed the first moderate resolution (30 m) maps of live aboveground plant biomass (g m −2 ) and woody plant dominance (%) for the Arctic tundra biome, including the mountainous Oro Arctic. We modeled biomass for the year 2020 using a new synthesis dataset of field biomass harvest measurements, Landsat satellite seasonal synthetic composites, ancillary geospatial data, and machine learning models. Additionally, we quantified pixel-wise uncertainty in biomass predictions using Monte Carlo simulations and validated the models using a robust, spatially blocked and nested cross-validation procedure. Observed plant and woody plant biomass values ranged from 0 to ∼6000 g m −2 (mean ≈ 350 g m −2 ), while predicted values ranged from 0 to ∼4000 g m −2 (mean ≈ 275 g m −2 ), resulting in model validation root-mean-squared-error (RMSE) ≈ 400 g m −2 and R 2 ≈ 0.6. Our maps not only capture large-scale patterns of plant biomass and woody plant dominance across the Arctic that are linked to climatic variation (e.g., thawing degree days), but also illustrate how fine-scale patterns are shaped by local surface hydrology, topography, and past disturbance. By providing data on plant biomass across Arctic tundra ecosystems at the highest resolution to date, our maps can significantly advance research and inform decision-making on topics ranging from Arctic vegetation monitoring and wildlife conservation to carbon accounting and land surface modeling.

Climate change↗

DOE OSTI2025

Water sources and land capacitor effects stimulate observed summer Arctic moistening and warming

The primary sources of recent summer Arctic moistening trends in reanalysis are uncertain, hindering attribution of observed Arctic warming due to radiative effects from water vapor changes. Here, we use a combined online numerical water tracer and circulation nudging approach in the Community Earth System Model to track the sources of water vapor beyond its initial sources. Trends in boreal summer large-scale circulation have driven moistening of the Arctic over recent decades, having a large impact on the Arctic radiative budget, accounting for 94% of the strengthening water vapor radiative feedback. We identify two key regions supplying the Arctic water vapor feedback: Northeast North America and western/central Eurasia. In both regions, anticyclonic circulations over the southwest Atlantic and eastern Europe move moisture from the tropical oceans poleward to high latitude land through precipitation in winter and spring. During summer, evapotranspiration over land releases this water vapor, and it is transported by winds into the Arctic. We refer to this sequence of terrestrial moisture storage and release as the land capacitor effect. Thus, the impacts of circulation changes on poleward moisture transport and land-atmosphere interactions over high latitudes represent the underlying mechanisms of the recent moistening and warming in the Arctic.

Arctic amplification↗

DOE OSTI2026

The role of local shipping emissions in aerosol-cloud interactions in the central Arctic

Arctic shipping is projected to increase as sea ice retreats, yet the impact of modern low-sulfur ship emissions on Arctic clouds and radiation remain poorly constrained. We use year-long in situ observations from the MOSAiC expedition to characterize ship-aerosol-cloud interactions for an icebreaker burning ultra-low sulfur fuel (0.1% mass per mass). Exhaust plumes were found to be strongly enriched in Aitken-mode particles, organic aerosol, and black carbon, but showed no detectable enhancement in particulate sulfate. Despite reduced hygroscopicity relative to ambient aerosols, ship emissions substantially increased local cloud condensation nuclei concentrations. A droplet activation parameterization was applied to quantify responses in cloud droplet number concentration ( N d ) to ship-induced perturbations in low-level Arctic clouds. In winter, abundant background accumulation-mode particles from Arctic haze supplied nearly all cloud droplets, while additional particles from ship emissions had little impact on N d . In contrast, during summer months, when unperturbed background aerosol concentrations are low, ship emissions nearly doubled N d compared to average background conditions and increased N d by a factor of five compared to very clean background conditions (25th percentile of background aerosol number concentrations). Longwave radiative transfer simulations for typical conditions of summer Arctic low-level clouds/fog suggest that these ship-induced increases in N d locally (i.e. <100 km downwind) lead to enhanced net surface longwave fluxes and consequent warming, primarily for optically thin clouds (liquid water path (LWP) ⩽ 30 g·m −2 ). For LWP = 10 g · m −2 , ship emissions lead to an increase of 1 W · m −2 in cloud longwave forcing at the surface compared to average unperturbed conditions (+7% relative increase), and up to 4 W · m −2 when compared to very clean background conditions (+22% relative increase). Even ultra-low sulfur fuel emissions can therefore locally and episodically modify Arctic cloud microphysics and radiative properties, especially during summer, implying that future increases in Arctic shipping could have non-negligible regional climate impacts.

Arctic↗

NASA NTRS2014

Air Mass Origin in the Arctic and its Response to Future Warming

We present the first climatology of air mass origin in the Arctic in terms of rigorously defined air mass fractions that partition air according to where it last contacted the planetary boundary layer (PBL). Results from a present-day climate integration of the GEOSCCM general circulation model reveal that the Arctic lower troposphere below 700 mb is dominated year round by air whose last PBL contact occurred poleward of 60degN, (Arctic air, or air of Arctic origin). By comparison, approx. 63% of the Arctic troposphere above 700 mb originates in the NH midlatitude PBL, (midlatitude air). Although seasonal changes in the total fraction of midlatitude air are small, there are dramatic changes in where that air last contacted the PBL, especially above 700 mb. Specifically, during winter air in the Arctic originates preferentially over the oceans, approx. 26% in the East Pacific, and approx. 20% in the Atlantic PBL. By comparison, during summer air in the Arctic last contacted the midlatitude PBL primarily over land, overwhelmingly so in Asia (approx. 40 %) and, to a lesser extent, in North America (approx. 24%). Seasonal changes in air-mass origin are interpreted in terms of seasonal variations in the large-scale ventilation of the midlatitude boundary layer and lower troposphere, namely changes in the midlatitude tropospheric jet and associated transient eddies during winter and large scale convective motions over midlatitudes during summer.

tropospheric transport↗

NASA NTRS2019

Arctic Amplification Response to Individual Climate Drivers

The Arctic is experiencing rapid climate change in response to changes in greenhouse gases, aerosols and other climate drivers. Emission changes in general, as well as geographical shifts in emissions and transport pathways of shortlived climate forcers, make it necessary to understand the influence of each climate driver on the Arctic. In the Precipitation Driver Response Model Intercomparison Project, ten global climate models perturbed five different climate drivers separately (CO2, CH4, the solar constant, BC and SO4). We show that the annual mean Arctic amplification (defined as the ratio between Arctic and the global mean temperature change) at the surface is similar between climate drivers, ranging from 1.9 (Â± an intermodel standard deviation of 0.4) for the solar to 2.3 (Â± 0.6) for the SO4 perturbations, with minimum amplification in the summer for all drivers. The vertical and seasonal temperature response patterns indicate that the Arctic is warmed through similar mechanisms for all climate drivers except BC. For all drivers, the precipitation change per degree global temperature change is positive in the Arctic, with a seasonality following that of the Arctic amplification. We find indications that SO4 perturbations produce a slightly stronger precipitation response than the other drivers, particularly compared to CO2.

greenhouse gases↗