Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “CLIMATE MODELING”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
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↗
DOE OSTI2024

A comparison of model validation approaches for echo state networks using climate model replicates

As global temperatures continue to rise, climate mitigation strategies such as stratospheric aerosol injections (SAI) are increasingly discussed, but the downstream effects of these strategies are not well understood. As such, there is interest in developing statistical methods to quantify the evolution of climate variable relationships during the time period surrounding an SAI. Feature importance applied to echo state network (ESN) models has been proposed as a way to understand the effects of SAI using a data-driven model. This approach depends on the ESN fitting the data well. If not, the feature importance may place importance on features that are not representative of the underlying relationships. Typically, time series prediction models such as ESNs are assessed using out-of-sample performance metrics that divide the times series into separate training and testing sets. However, this model assessment approach is geared towards forecasting applications and not scenarios such as the motivating SAI example where the objective is using a data driven model to capture variable relationships. Here, in this paper, we demonstrate a novel use of climate model replicates to investigate the applicability of the commonly used repeated hold-out model assessment approach for the SAI application. Simulations of an SAI are generated using a simplified climate model, and different initialization conditions are used to provide independent training and testing sets containing the same SAI event. The climate model replicates enable out-of-sample measures of model performance, which are compared to the single time series hold-out validation approach. For our case study, it is found that the repeated hold-out sample performance is comparable, but conservative, to the replicate out-of-sample performance when the training set contains enough time after the aerosol injection.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

“Which Projections Do I Use?” Strategies for Climate Model Ensemble Subset Selection Based on Regional Stakeholder Needs

Climate model (or earth system model) projections are increasingly used for climate adaptation planning and impact assessments. As part of this process, many end‐users evaluate a subset of downscaled climate projections without being aware of the implications of downscaling methodology for statistics or event outcomes. Approaches for determining a subset of global climate models to use often focus on values from the raw models, rather than from their downscaled counterparts, in other words assuming that the statistical distribution of the multi‐model ensemble does not change post downscaling. This study demonstrates that a downscaled ensemble will typically retain the change distribution as a raw ensemble, but individual models can differ dramatically post‐downscaling. We recommend that subset‐selection methods account for this possibility and that decision‐relevant downscaled climate projections provide proper descriptions of fitness‐for‐purpose and essential caveats, so that non‐specialists can interpret the results with an appropriate level of confidence.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

The GFDL‐CM4X Climate Model Hierarchy, Part I: Model Description and Thermal Properties

We present the GFDL‐CM4X (Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Climate Model version 4X) coupled climate model hierarchy. The primary application for CM4X is to investigate ocean and sea ice physics as part of a realistic coupled Earth climate model. CM4X utilizes an updated MOM6 (Modular Ocean Model version 6) ocean physics package relative to CM4.0, and there are two members of the hierarchy: one that uses a horizontal grid spacing of 0.25° (referred to as CM4X‐p25) and the other that uses a grid 0.125° (CM4X‐p125). CM4X also refines its atmospheric grid from the nominally 100 km (cubed sphere C96) of CM4.0–50 km (C192). Finally, CM4X simplifies the land model to allow for a more focused study of the role of ocean changes to global mean climate. CM4X‐p125 reaches a global ocean area mean heat flux imbalance of -0.02 W m -2 within $\mathcal{O}$ (150) years in a pre‐industrial simulation, and retains that thermally equilibrated state over the subsequent centuries. This 1850 thermal equilibrium is characterized by roughly 400 ZJ less ocean heat than present‐day, which corresponds to estimates for anthropogenic ocean heat uptake between 1870 and present‐day. CM4X‐p25 approaches its thermal equilibrium only after more than 1000 years, at which time its ocean has roughly 1100 ZJ more heat than its early 21st century ocean initial state. Furthermore, the root‐mean‐square sea surface temperature bias for historical simulations is roughly 20% smaller in CM4X‐p125 relative to CM4X‐p25 (and CM4.0). We offer the mesoscale dominance hypothesis for why CM4X‐p125 shows such favorable thermal equilibration properties.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2018

Global-scale multidecadal variability missing in state-of-the-art climate models

Reliability of future global warming projections depends on how well climate models reproduce the observed climate change over the twentieth century. In this regard, deviations of the model-simulated climate change from observations, such as a recent “pause” in global warming, have received considerable attention. Such decadal mismatches between model-simulated and observed climate trends are common throughout the twentieth century, and their causes are still poorly understood. Here we show that the discrepancies between the observed and simulated climate variability on decadal and longer timescale have a coherent structure suggestive of a pronounced Global Multidecadal Oscillation. Surface temperature anomalies associated with this variability originate in the North Atlantic and spread out to the Pacific and Southern oceans and Antarctica, with Arctic following suit in about 25–35 years. While climate models exhibit various levels of decadal climate variability and some regional similarities to observations, none of the model simulations considered match the observed signal in terms of its magnitude, spatial patterns and their sequential time development. These results highlight a substantial degree of uncertainty in our interpretation of the observed climate change using current generation of climate models.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

The Importance of Weather and Climate to Energy Systems: A Workshop on Next Generation Challenges in Energy–Climate Modeling

More than 80 international participants, representing weather, climate, and energy systems research, joined two 4-hour remote sessions to highlight and prioritize ongoing and future challenges in energy-climate modelling. The workshop had two primary goals: to build a deeper engagement across the “energy” and “climate” research communities, and to identify and begin to address the scientific challenges associated with modelling climate risk in energy systems.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Evaluation of simulations of near-surface variables using the regional climate model CCLM for the MOSAiC winter period

The ship-based experiment MOSAiC 2019/2020 was carried out during a full year in the Arctic and yielded an excellent data set to test the parameterizations of ocean/sea-ice/atmosphere interaction processes in regional climate models (RCMs). In the present paper, near-surface data during MOSAiC are used for the verification of the RCM COnsortium for Small-scale MOdel–Climate Limited area Mode (COSMO-CLM or CCLM). CCLM is used in a forecast mode (nested in ERA5) for the whole Arctic with 15 km resolution and is run with different configurations of sea ice data. These include the standard sea ice concentration taken from passive microwave data with around 6 km resolution, sea ice concentration from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) thermal infrared data and MODIS sea ice lead fraction data for the winter period. CCLM simulations show a good agreement with the measurements. Relatively large negative biases for temperature occur for November and December, which are likely associated with a too large ice thickness used by CCLM. The consideration of sea ice leads in the sub-grid parameterization in CCLM yields improved results for the near-surface temperature. ERA5 data show a large warm bias of about 2.5°C and an underestimation of the temperature variability.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Matilda v1.0: An R package for probabilistic climate projections using a reduced complexity climate model

A primary advantage to using reduced complexity climate models (RCMs) has been their ability to quickly conduct probabilistic climate projections, a key component of uncertainty quantification in many impact studies and multisector systems. Providing frameworks for such analyses has been a target of several RCMs used in studies of the future co-evolution of the human and Earth systems. In this paper, we present Matilda, an open-science R software package that facilitates probabilistic climate projection analysis, implemented here using the Hector simple climate model in a seamless and easily applied framework. The primary goal of Matilda is to provide the user with a turn-key method to build parameter sets from literature-based prior distributions, run Hector iteratively to produce perturbed parameter ensembles (PPEs), weight ensembles for realism against observed historical climate data, and compute probabilistic projections for different climate variables. This workflow gives the user the ability to explore viable parameter space and propagate uncertainty to model ensembles with just a few lines of code. The package provides significant freedom to select different scoring criteria and algorithms to weight ensemble members, as well as the flexibility to implement custom criteria. Additionally, the architecture of the package simplifies the process of building and analyzing PPEs without requiring significant programming expertise, to accommodate diverse use cases. We present a case study that provides illustrative results of a probabilistic analysis of mean global surface temperature as an example of the software application.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

A seamless approach for evaluating climate models across spatial scales

In regions of the world where topography varies significantly with distance, most global climate models (GCMs) have spatial resolutions that are too coarse to accurately simulate key meteorological variables that are influenced by topography, such as clouds, precipitation, and surface temperatures. One approach to tackle this challenge is to run climate models of sufficiently high resolution in those topographically complex regions such as the North American Regionally Refined Model (NARRM) subset of the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 2 (E3SM v2). Although high-resolution simulations are expected to provide unprecedented details of atmospheric processes, running models at such high resolutions remains computationally expensive compared to lower-resolution models such as the E3SM Low Resolution (LR). Moreover, because regionally refined and high-resolution GCMs are relatively new, there are a limited number of observational datasets and frameworks available for evaluating climate models with regionally varying spatial resolutions. As such, we developed a new framework to quantify the added value of high spatial resolution in simulating precipitation over the contiguous United States (CONUS). To determine its viability, we applied the framework to two model simulations and an observational dataset. We first remapped all the data into Hierarchical Equal-Area Iso-Latitude Pixelization (HEALPix) pixels. HEALPix offers several mathematical properties that enable seamless evaluation of climate models across different spatial resolutions including its equal-area and partitioning properties. The remapped HEALPix-based data are used to show how the spatial variability of both observed and simulated precipitation changes with resolution increases. This study provides valuable insights into the requirements for achieving accurate simulations of precipitation patterns over the CONUS. It highlights the importance of allocating sufficient computational resources to run climate models at higher temporal and spatial resolutions to capture spatial patterns effectively. Furthermore, the study demonstrates the effectiveness of the HEALPix framework in evaluating precipitation simulations across different spatial resolutions. This framework offers a viable approach for comparing observed and simulated data when dealing with datasets of varying spatial resolutions. By employing this framework, researchers can extend its usage to other climate variables, datasets, and disciplines that require comparing datasets with different spatial resolutions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Significant impact of forcing uncertainty in a large ensemble of climate model simulations

Forcing due to solar and volcanic variability, on the natural side, and greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions, on the anthropogenic side, are the main inputs to climate models. Reliable climate model simulations of past and future climate change depend crucially upon them. Here we analyze large ensembles of simulations using a comprehensive Earth System Model to quantify uncertainties in global climate change attributable to differences in prescribed forcings. The different forcings considered here are those used in the two most recent phases of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), namely CMIP5 and CMIP6. We show significant differences in simulated global surface air temperature due to volcanic aerosol forcing in the second half of the 19th century and in the early 21st century. The latter arise from small-to-moderate eruptions incorporated in CMIP6 simulations but not in CMIP5 simulations. We also find significant differences in global surface air temperature and Arctic sea ice area due to anthropogenic aerosol forcing in the second half of the 20th century and early 21st century. These differences are as large as those obtained in different versions of an Earth System Model employing identical forcings. In simulations from 2015 to 2100, we find significant differences in the rates of projected global warming arising from CMIP5 and CMIP6 concentration pathways that differ slightly but are equivalent in terms of their nominal radiative forcing levels in 2100. Our results highlight the influence of assumptions about natural and anthropogenic aerosol loadings on carbon budgets, the likelihood of meeting Paris targets, and the equivalence of future forcing scenarios.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2018

Calibrating Climate Model Ensembles for Assessing Extremes in a Changing Climate

Climate models serve as indispensable tools to investigate the effect of anthropogenic emissions on current and future climate, including extremes. However, as low-dimensional approximations of the climate system, they will always exhibit biases. Several attempts have been made to correct for biases as they affect extremes prediction, predominantly focused on correcting model-simulated distribution shapes. In this study, the effectiveness of a recently published quantile-based bias correction scheme, as well as a new subset selection method introduced here, are tested out-of-sample using model-as-truth experiments. Results show that biases in the shape of distributions tend to persist through time, and therefore, correcting for shape bias is useful for past and future statements characterizing the probability of extremes. However, for statements characterized by a ratio of the probabilities of extremes between two periods, we find that correcting for shape bias often provides no skill improvement due to the dominating effect of bias in the long-term trend. Using a toy model experiment, we examine the relative importance of the shape of the distribution versus its position in response to long-term changes in radiative forcing. It confirms that the relative position of the two distributions, based on the trend, is at least as important as the shape. We encourage the community to consider all model biases relevant to their metric of interest when using a bias correction procedure and to construct out-of-sample tests that mirror the intended application.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

The Convective-To-Total Precipitation Ratio and the “Drizzling” Bias in Climate Models

Overestimation of precipitation frequency and duration while underestimating intensity, that is, the “drizzling” bias, has been a long-standing problem of global climate models. Here we explore this issue from the perspective of precipitation partitioning. We found that most models in the Climate Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) have high convective-to-total precipitation (PC/PR) ratios in low latitudes. Convective precipitation has higher frequency and longer duration but lower intensity than non-convective precipitation in many models. As a result, the high PC/PR ratio contributes to the “drizzling” bias over low latitudes. The PC/PR ratio and associated “drizzling” bias increase as model resolution coarsens from 0.5° to 2.0°, but the resolution's effect weakens as the grid spacing increases from 2.0° to 3.0°. Some of the CMIP6 models show reduced “drizzling” bias associated with decreased PC/PR ratio. Thus, more reasonable precipitation partitioning, along with finer model resolution should alleviate the “drizzling” bias within current climate models.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗