SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Climate scientists collaborated in a nationwide event to analyze and compare archived Earth system model simulations and to generate input for the IPCC's upcoming climate change report.
Climate model simulations are an important source of information about our planet’s climate system and also enable informed decision-making under different future scenarios. As a new archive of results from the next generation of climate models is anticipated to become available with the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 7 (CMIP7), the need to develop efficient and robust methods to evaluate models is paramount. Observations are an integral part of model evaluation, providing a means to quantify and understand the degree to which climate models can faithfully reproduce Earth system processes. Such analysis is critical for constraining climate projections, identifying areas of focus for model development, and assisting analysts in deciphering the utility of models for specific applications. Observations of Earth system come from a diversity of sources, span different space–time domains, and are produced by different communities, and each dataset features different data structures and formats, metadata standards, and its own unique uncertainties. Uncertainties in an observational dataset may stem from gaps in temporal and spatial coverage, instrumentation errors, or assumptions in retrieval and processing methods. How then does one ensure that observational data are ready for use and utilized in the most appropriate way for robust, rapid, and routine climate model evaluation? The CMIP7 Model Benchmarking Task Team with input from the broader climate modeling, model evaluation, and observational data communities present a vision and considerations for best practices toward the optimal and appropriate use of observational data to support next-generation climate model evaluation.
The process of parameter estimation targeting a chosen set of observations is an essential aspect of numerical modeling. This process is usually named tuning in the climate modeling community. In climate models, the variety and complexity of physical processes involved, and their interplay through a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, must be summarized in a series of approximate submodels. Most submodels depend on uncertain parameters. Tuning consists of adjusting the values of these parameters to bring the solution as a whole into line with aspects of the observed climate. Tuning is an essential aspect of climate modeling with its own scientific issues, which is probably not advertised enough outside the community of model developers. Optimization of climate models raises important questions about whether tuning methods a priori constrain the model results in unintended ways that would affect our confidence in climate projections. Here, we present the definition and rationale behind model tuning, review specific methodological aspects, and survey the diversity of tuning approaches used in current climate models. We also discuss the challenges and opportunities in applying so-called objective methods in climate model tuning. Here, we discuss how tuning methodologies may affect fundamental results of climate models, such as climate sensitivity. The article concludes with a series of recommendations to make the process of climate model tuning more transparent.
We quantify the effective radiative forcing (ERF) of anthropogenic aerosols modelled by the aerosol–climate model CAM5.3-MARC-ARG. CAM5.3-MARC-ARG is a new configuration of the Community Atmosphere Model version 5.3 (CAM5.3) in which the default aerosol module has been replaced by the two-Moment, Multi-Modal, Mixing-state-resolving Aerosol model for Research of Climate (MARC). CAM5.3-MARC-ARG uses the ARG aerosol-activation scheme, consistent with the default configuration of CAM5.3. We compute differences between simulations using year-1850 aerosol emissions and simulations using year-2000 aerosol emissions in order to assess the radiative effects of anthropogenic aerosols. We compare the aerosol lifetimes, aerosol column burdens, cloud properties, and radiative effects produced by CAM5.3-MARC-ARG with those produced by the default configuration of CAM5.3, which uses the modal aerosol module with three log-normal modes (MAM3), and a configuration using the modal aerosol module with seven log-normal modes (MAM7). Compared with MAM3 and MAM7, we find that MARC produces stronger cooling via the direct radiative effect, the shortwave cloud radiative effect, and the surface albedo radiative effect; similarly, MARC produces stronger warming via the longwave cloud radiative effect. Overall, MARC produces a global mean net ERF of - 1.79 ± 0.03 W m -2 , which is stronger than the global mean net ERF of - 1.57 ± 0.04 W m -2 produced by MAM3 and - 1.53 ± 0.04 W m -2 produced by MAM7. The regional distribution of ERF also differs between MARC and MAM3, largely due to differences in the regional distribution of the shortwave cloud radiative effect. We conclude that the specific representation of aerosols in global climate models, including aerosol mixing state, has important implications for climate modelling.
Abstract The Canada Basin has exhibited a significant trend toward a fresher surface layer and thus a more stratified upper‐ocean over the past three decades. State‐of‐the‐art ice‐ocean models, by contrast, tend to simulate a surface layer that is saltier and less stratified than observed. Here, we examine decadal changes to seasonal processes that may contribute to this wide‐reaching model bias using climate model simulations from the Community Earth System Model and below‐ice observations from the Arctic Ice Dynamics Joint Experiment in 1975 and Ice Tethered Profilers in 2006–2012. In contrast to the observations, the models simulate salinity profiles that show relatively little variation between 1975 and 2012. We demonstrate that this bias can be mainly attributed to unrealistically deep vertical mixing in the model, creating a surface layer that is saltier than observed. The results provide insight for climate model improvement with broad implications for Arctic sea ice and ecosystem dynamics.
The global climate model is extended through the stratosphere by increasing the vertical resolution and raising the rigid model top to the 0.01 mb (75 km) level. The inclusion of a realistic stratosphere is necessary for the investigation of the climate effects of stratospheric perturbations, such as changes of ozone, aerosols or solar ultraviolet irradiance, as well as for studying the effect on the stratosphere of tropospheric climate changes. The observed temperature and wind patterns throughout the troposphere and stratosphere are simulated. In addition to the excess planetary wave amplitude in the upper stratosphere, other model deficiences include the Northern Hemisphere lower stratospheric temperatures being 5 to 10 C too cold in winter at high latitudes and the temperature at 50 to 60 km altitude near the equator are too cold. Methods of correcting these deficiencies are discussed.
Energy balance climate models of the Budyko-Sellers variety are applied to the carbon-dioxide cycle on Mars. Recent data available from the Viking mission, in particular the seasonal pressure variations measured by Viking landers, are used to constrain the models. No set of parameters was found for which a one-dimensional model parameterized in terms of ground temperature gave an adequate fit to the observed pressure variations. A modified, two-dimensional model including the effects of dust storms and the polar hood reasonably reproduces the pressure curve, however. The implications of these results for Martian climate changes are discussed.
Surface longwave emissivity can be less than unity and vary significantly with frequency. However, most climate models still assume a blackbody surface in the longwave (LW) radiation scheme of their atmosphere models. This study incorporates realistic surface spectral emissivity into the atmospheric component of the Community Earth System Model (CESM), version 1.1.1, and evaluates its impact on simulated climate. By ensuring consistency of the broadband surface longwave flux across different components of the CESM, the top-of-the-atmosphere (TOA) energy balance in the modified model can be attained without retuning the model. Inclusion of surface spectral emissivity, however, leads to a decrease of net upward longwave flux at the surface and a comparable increase of latent heat flux. Global-mean surface temperature difference between the modified and standard CESM simulation is 0.20 K for the fully coupled run and 0.45 K for the slab-ocean run. Noticeable surface temperature differences between the modified and standard CESM simulations are seen over the Sahara Desert and polar regions. Accordingly, the climatological mean sea ice fraction in the modified CESM simulation can be less than that in the standard CESM simulation by as much as 0.1 in some regions. When spectral emissivities of sea ice and open ocean surfaces are considered, the broadband LW sea ice emissivity feedback is estimated to be −0.003 W m −2 K −1 , assuming flat ice emissivity as sea ice emissivity, and 0.002 W m −2 K −1 , assuming coarse snow emissivity as sea ice emissivity, which are two orders of magnitude smaller than the surface albedo feedback.
Three climate models are evaluated using in situ airborne observations from the Southern Ocean Clouds, Radiation, Aerosol Transport Experimental Study (SOCRATES) campaign. The evaluation targets cloud phases, microphysical properties, thermodynamic conditions, and aerosol indirect effects from –40°C to 0°C. Compared with 580-s averaged observations (i.e., 100 km horizontal scale), the Community Atmosphere Model version 6 (CAM6) shows the most similar result for cloud phase frequency distribution and allows more liquid-containing clouds below –10°C compared with its predecessor—CAM5. The Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) underestimates (overestimates) ice phase frequencies below (above) –20°C. CAM6 and E3SM show liquid and ice water contents (i.e., LWC and IWC) similar to observations from –25°C to 0°C, but higher LWC and lower IWC than observations at lower temperatures. Simulated in-cloud RH shows higher minimum values than observations, possibly restricting ice growth during sedimentation. As number concentrations of aerosols larger than 500 nm (Na 500 ) increase, observations show increases of LWC, IWC, liquid, and ice number concentrations (N liq , N ice ). Number concentrations of aerosols larger than 100 nm (Na 100 ) only show positive correlations with LWC and N liq . From –20°C to 0°C, higher aerosol number concentrations are correlated with lower glaciation ratio and higher cloud fraction. From –40°C to –20°C, large aerosols show positive correlations with glaciation ratio. CAM6 shows small increases of LWC and N liq with Na 500 and Na 100 . E3SM shows small increases of N ice with Na 500 . Altogether, CAM6 and E3SM underestimate aerosol indirect effects on ice crystals and supercooled liquid droplets over the Southern Ocean.
The GLAS climate model is a general circulation model based on the primitive equations in sigma coordinates on a global domain in the presence of orography. The model incorporates parameterizations of the effects of radiation, convection, large scale latent heat release, turbulent and boundary layer fluxes, and ground hydrology. Winter and summer simulations were carried out with this model, and the resulting data are compared to observations.
Climate change simulations run with two different resolutions (8 deg by 10 deg and 4 deg by 5 deg) of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies model are used to investigate radiative, dynamical, and regional sensitivities to model grid size. The results show that model resolution affected two key processes in the control runs, moist convection and the nonlinear transfer of kinetic energy into the zonal mean flow. It was found that the finer resolution model has more penetrative convection but less convection overall, with the results that its temperature and wind structure were altered with respect to the coarser grid model.
The range of results from climate models and scenarios is important to the understanding of uncertainty in power planning analysis. A U.S. Department of Energy-funded analytic project called Power Planning for Alignment of Climate and Energy Systems is developing data and analytic methods to reflect the effects of climate change on key variables for power system planning, as part of the Grid Modernization Lab Consortium. This project will select and prepare global climate model results for use in power system planning models. A related report (Evaluation of Global Climate Models for Use in Energy Analysis) assesses the performance of various global climate models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 data archive for their historical skill with respect to energy system performance and for their future projections under multiple climate change scenarios. Building from that report, we describe the selection of a climate scenario (Shared Socioeconomic Pathway [SSP] 2-4.5) and five climate models: TaiESM1, EC-Earth3-CC, GFDL-CM4, EC-Earth3-Veg, and MPI-ESM1-2-HR. We describe the model selection criteria, which were based on the quality of the match between model results under historical conditions and on the representation of the range of future values for several variables. These results will be downscaled via an open-source generative machine learning method called Super-Resolution for Renewable Energy Resource Data with Climate Change Impacts.
Traditional approaches for comparing global climate models and observational data products typically fail to account for the geographic location of the underlying weather station data. For modern global high-resolution models with a horizontal resolution of tens of kilometers, this is an oversight since there are likely grid cells where the physical output of a climate model is compared with a statistically interpolated quantity instead of actual measurements of the climate system. In this paper, we quantify the impact of geographic sampling on the relative performance of high-resolution climate model representations of precipitation extremes in boreal winter (December–January–February) over the contiguous United States (CONUS), comparing model output from five early submissions to the HighResMIP subproject of the CMIP6 experiment. We find that properly accounting for the geographic sampling of weather stations can significantly change the assessment of model performance. Across the models considered, failing to account for sampling impacts the different metrics (extreme bias, spatial pattern correlation, and spatial variability) in different ways (both increasing and decreasing). We argue that the geographic sampling of weather stations should be accounted for in order to yield a more straightforward and appropriate comparison between models and observational data sets, particularly for high-resolution models with a horizontal resolution of tens of kilometers. While we focus on the CONUS in this paper, our results have important implications for other global land regions where the sampling problem is more severe.
A simple nonlinear energy balance climate model yields a precession index-like term in the temperature. Despite its importance in the geologic record, the precession index e sin (Omega)S, where e is the Earth's orbital eccentricity and (Omega)S is the Sun's perigee in the geocentric frame, is not present in the insolation at the top of the atmosphere. Hence there is no one-for-one mapping of 23,000 and 19,000 year periodicities from the insolation to the paleoclimate record; a nonlinear climate model is needed to produce these long periods. A nonlinear energy balance climate model with radiative terms of form T n, where T is surface temperature and n less than 1, does produce e sin (omega)S terms in temperature; the e sin (omega)S terms are called Seversmith psychroterms. Without feedback mechanisms, the model achieves extreme values of 0.64 K at the maximum orbital eccentricity of 0.06, cooling one hemisphere while simultaneously warming the other; the hemisphere over which perihelion occurs is the cooler. In other words, the nonlinear energy balance model produces long-term cooling in the northern hemisphere when the Sun's perihelion is near northern summer solstice and long-term warming in the northern hemisphere when the aphelion is near northern summer solstice. (This behavior is similar to the inertialess gray body which radiates like T 4, but the amplitude is much lower for the energy balance model because of its thermal inertia.) This seemingly paradoxical behavior works against the standard Milankovitch model, which requires cool northern summers (Sun far from Earth in northern summer) to build up northern ice sheets, so that if the standard model is correct it must be more efficient than previously thought. Alternatively, the new mechanism could possibly be dominant and indicate southern hemisphere control of the northern ice sheets, wherein the southern oceans undergo a long-term cooling when the Sun is far from the Earth during northern summer. The cold water eventually flows north, cooling the northern hemisphere. This might explain why the northern oceans lag the southern ones when it comes to orbital forcing.
A method is developed for computing the ground temperature accurately over both the diurnal and annual cycles. The ground is divided vertically into only two or three slabs, resulting in very efficient computation. Seasonal storage and release of heat is incorporated, and thus the method is well suited for use in climate models.
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.
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.
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.