SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “CMIP5”

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 109 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2020

Large-scale features and evaluation of the PMIP4-CMIP6 midHolocene simulations

The mid-Holocene (6000 years ago) is a standard time period for the evaluation of the simulated response of global climate models using palaeoclimate reconstructions. The latest mid-Holocene simulations are a palaeoclimate entry card for the Palaeoclimate Model Intercomparison Project (PMIP4) component of the current phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) – hereafter referred to as PMIP4-CMIP6. Here we provide an initial analysis and evaluation of the results of the experiment for the mid-Holocene. We show that state-of-the-art models produce climate changes that are broadly consistent with theory and observations, including increased summer warming of the Northern Hemisphere and associated shifts in tropical rainfall. Many features of the PMIP4-CMIP6 simulations were present in the previous generation (PMIP3-CMIP5) of simulations. The PMIP4-CMIP6 ensemble for the mid-Holocene has a global mean temperature change of −0.3 K, which is −0.2 K cooler than the PMIP3-CMIP5 simulations predominantly as a result of the prescription of realistic greenhouse gas concentrations in PMIP4-CMIP6. Biases in the magnitude and the sign of regional responses identified in PMIP3-CMIP5, such as the amplification of the northern African monsoon, precipitation changes over Europe, and simulated aridity in mid-Eurasia, are still present in the PMIP4-CMIP6 simulations. Despite these issues, PMIP4-CMIP6 and the mid-Holocene provide an opportunity both for quantitative evaluation and derivation of emergent constraints on the hydrological cycle, feedback strength, and potentially climate sensitivity.

mid-Holocene simulations↗

NASA NTRS2021

Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6

The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) defines and coordinates the main set of future climate projections, based on concentration-driven simulations, within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6). This paper presents a range of its outcomes by synthesizing results from the participating global coupled Earth system models. We limit our scope to the analysis of strictly geophysical outcomes: mainly global averages and spatial patterns of change for surface air temperature and precipitation. We also compare CMIP6 projections to CMIP5 results, especially for those scenarios that were designed to provide continuity across the CMIP phases, at the same time highlighting important differences in forcing composition, as well as in results. The range of future temperature and precipitation changes by the end of the century (2081–2100) encompassing the Tier 1 experiments based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5) and SSP1-1.9 spans a larger range of outcomes compared to CMIP5, due to higher warming (by close to 1.5 °C) reached at the upper end of the 5 %–95 % envelope of the highest scenario (SSP5-8.5). This is due to both the wider range of radiative forcing that the new scenarios cover and the higher climate sensitivities in some of the new models compared to their CMIP5 predecessors. Spatial patterns of change for temperature and precipitation averaged over models and scenarios have familiar features, and an analysis of their variations confirms model structural differences to be the dominant source of uncertainty. Models also differ with respect to the size and evolution of internal variability as measured by individual models' initial condition ensemble spreads, according to a set of initial condition ensemble simulations available under SSP3-7.0. These experiments suggest a tendency for internal variability to decrease along the course of the century in this scenario, a result that will benefit from further analysis over a larger set of models. Benefits of mitigation, all else being equal in terms of societal drivers, appear clearly when comparing scenarios developed under the same SSP but to which different degrees of mitigation have been applied. It is also found that a mild overshoot in temperature of a few decades around mid-century, as represented in SSP5-3.4OS, does not affect the end outcome of temperature and precipitation changes by 2100, which return to the same levels as those reached by the gradually increasing SSP4-3.4 (not erasing the possibility, however, that other aspects of the system may not be as easily reversible). Central estimates of the time at which the ensemble means of the different scenarios reach a given warming level might be biased by the inclusion of models that have shown faster warming in the historical period than the observed. Those estimates show all scenarios reaching 1.5 °C of warming compared to the 1850–1900 baseline in the second half of the current decade, with the time span between slow and fast warming covering between 20 and 27 years from present. The warming level of 2 °C of warming is reached as early as 2039 by the ensemble mean under SSP5-8.5 but as late as the mid-2060s under SSP1-2.6. The highest warming level considered (5 °C) is reached by the ensemble mean only under SSP5-8.5 and not until the mid-2090s.d-2090s.

Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMI↗

NASA NTRS2022

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

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

climate models↗

DOE OSTI2023

Evaluating Northern Hemisphere Growing Season Net Carbon Flux in Climate Models Using Aircraft Observations

Understanding terrestrial ecosystems and their response to anthropogenic climate change requires quantification of land-atmosphere carbon exchange. However, top-down and bottom-up estimates of large-scale land-atmosphere fluxes, including the northern extratropical growing season net flux (GSNF), show significant discrepancies. We developed a data-driven metric for the GSNF using atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration observations collected during the High-Performance Instrumented Airborne Platform for Environmental Research Pole-to-Pole Observations and Atmospheric Tomography Mission flight campaigns. This aircraft-derived metric is bias-corrected using three independent atmospheric inversion systems. We estimate the northern extratropical GSNF to be 5.7 ± 0.3 Pg C and use it to evaluate net biosphere productivity from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 and 6 (CMIP5 and CMIP6) models. While the model-to-model spread in the GSNF has decreased in the CMIP6 models relative to that of the CMIP5 models, there is still disagreement on the magnitude and timing of seasonal carbon uptake with most models underestimating the GSNF and overestimating the length of the growing season relative to the observations. We also use an emergent constraint approach to estimate annual northern extratropical gross primary productivity to be 56 ± 17 Pg C, heterotrophic respiration to be 25 ± 13 Pg C, and net primary productivity to be 28 ± 12 Pg C. The flux inferred from these aircraft observations provides an additional constraint on large-scale gross fluxes in prognostic Earth system models that may ultimately improve our ability to accurately predict carbon-climate feedbacks.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2014

Evaluation of the Surface Representation of the Greenland Ice Sheet in a General Circulation Model

Simulated surface conditions of the Goddard Earth Observing System model, version 5 (GEOS 5) atmospheric general circulation model (AGCM) are examined for the contemporary Greenland Ice Sheet (GrIS). A surface parameterization that explicitly models surface processes including snow compaction, meltwater percolation and refreezing, and surface albedo is found to remedy an erroneous deficit in the annual net surface energy flux and provide an adequate representation of surface mass balance (SMB) in an evaluation using simulations at two spatial resolutions. The simulated 1980-2008 GrIS SMB average is 24.7+/-4.5 cm yr(- 1) water-equivalent (w.e.) at.5 degree model grid spacing, and 18.2+/-3.3 cm yr(- 1) w.e. for 2 degree grid spacing. The spatial variability and seasonal cycle of the simulation compare favorably to recent studies using regional climate models, while results from 2 degree integrations reproduce the primary features of the SMB field. In comparison to historical glaciological observations, the coarser resolution model overestimates accumulation in the southern areas of the GrIS, while the overall SMB is underestimated. These changes relate to the sensitivity of accumulation and melt to the resolution of topography. The GEOS-5 SMB fields contrast with available corresponding atmospheric models simulations from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). It is found that only a few of the CMIP5 AGCMs examined provide significant summertime runoff, a dominant feature of the GrIS seasonal cycle. This is a condition that will need to be remedied if potential contributions to future eustatic change from polar ice sheets are to be examined with GCMs.

AGCM↗

NASA NTRS2019

Land–Atmosphere Feedbacks Exacerbate Concurrent Soil Drought and Atmospheric Aridity

Compound extremes such as cooccurring soil drought (low soil moisture) and atmospheric aridity (high vapor pressure deficit) can be disastrous for natural and societal systems. Soil drought and atmospheric aridity are 2 main physiological stressors driving widespread vegetation mortality and reduced terrestrial carbon uptake. Here, we empirically demonstrate that strong negative coupling between soil moisture and vapor pressure deficit occurs globally, indicating high probability of cooccurring soil drought and atmospheric aridity. Using the Global Land Atmosphere Coupling Experiment (GLACE)-CMIP5 experiment, we further show that concurrent soil drought and atmospheric aridity are greatly exacerbated by land– atmosphere feedbacks. The feedback of soil drought on the atmosphere is largely responsible for enabling atmospheric aridity extremes. In addition, the soil moisture–precipitation feedback acts to amplify precipitation and soil moisture deficits in most regions. CMIP5 models further show that the frequency of concurrent soil drought and atmospheric aridity enhanced by land–atmosphere feedbacks is projected to increase in the 21st century. Importantly, land– atmosphere feedbacks will greatly increase the intensity of both soil drought and atmospheric aridity beyond that expected from changes in mean climate alone.

Compound extreme events↗

DOE OSTI2021

Market expectations of a warming climate

In this paper, we compare prices of financial derivatives whose payouts are based on future weather outcomes to CMIP5 climate model predictions as well as observed weather station data across eight cities in the US from 2001 through 2020. Derivative prices respond both to short-term weather forecasts for the next two weeks and longer-term warming trends. We show that the long-term trends in derivative prices are comparable to station-level data and climate model output. The one exception is February in the northeastern US, where financial markets price in a polar vortex-induced cooling effect, a recent scientific finding that was not present in the older CMIP5 climate output. When looking at the spatial and temporal heterogeneity in trends, futures prices are more aligned with climate model output than observed weather station trends, suggesting that market participants closely align their expectations with scientific projections rather than recent observations.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Quantifying Progress Across Different CMIP Phases With the ESMValTool

Abstract More than 40 model groups worldwide are participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6), providing a new and rich source of information to better understand past, present, and future climate change. Here, we use the Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) to assess the performance of the CMIP6 ensemble compared to the previous generations CMIP3 and CMIP5. While CMIP5 models did not capture the observed pause in the increase in global mean surface temperature between 1998 and 2013, the historical CMIP6 simulations agree well with the observed recent temperature increase, but some models have difficulties in reproducing the observed global mean surface temperature record of the second half of the twentieth century. While systematic biases in annual mean surface temperature and precipitation remain in the CMIP6 multimodel mean, individual models and high‐resolution versions of the models show significant reductions in many long‐standing biases. Some improvements are also found in the vertical temperature, water vapor, and zonal wind speed distributions, and root‐mean‐square errors for selected fields are generally smaller with reduced intermodel spread and higher average skill in the correlation patterns relative to observations. An emerging property of the CMIP6 ensemble is a higher effective climate sensitivity with an increased range between 2.3 and 5.6 K. A possible reason for this increase in some models is improvements in cloud representation resulting in stronger shortwave cloud feedbacks than in their predecessor versions.

Bock, L.↗

DOE OSTI2021

An underestimated negative cloud feedback from cloud lifetime changes

As the atmosphere warms, part of the cloud population shifts from ice and mixed phase (“cold”) to liquid (“warm”) clouds. Because warm clouds are more reflective and longerlived, this phase change reduces the solar flux absorbed by Earth and constitutes a negative radiative feedback. This cooling feedback is weaker in CMIP6 than in CMIP5, contributing to greater greenhouse warming. While this change is often attributed to improvements in simulated cloud phase, another model bias persists: warm clouds precipitate too readily, potentially leading to underestimated negative lifetime feedbacks. In this work, we modify a climate model to better simulate warm rain probability and find it exhibits a cloud lifetime feedback nearly three times larger than the default model. This suggests model errors in cloud-precipitation processes may bias cloud feedbacks as much as CMIP5–CMIP6 climate sensitivity differences. Reliable climate model projections therefore require improved cloud process realism guided by process-oriented observations and observational constraints.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Bimodality in simulated precipitation frequency distributions and its relationship with convective parameterizations

Abstract Bimodality in precipitation frequency distributions is often evident in atmospheric models, but rarely in observations. This study i) proposes a metric to objectively quantify the bimodality in precipitation distributions, ii) evaluates model simulations contributed to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) phase 5 (CMIP5), phase 6 (CMIP6), and the DYnamics of the Atmospheric general circulation Modeled On Non-hydrostatic Domains (DYAMOND) project by comparing them to satellite-based and reanalysis precipitation products, and iii) investigates possible origins of bimodal precipitation distributions. Our results reveal that about 83% (20 out of 24) of CMIP5 and 70% (21 out of 30) of CMIP6 models used in this study exhibit bimodal distributions. The few DYAMOND models that use a deep convective parameterization also show bimodal distributions, while most DYAMOND models do not. Predictably, the bimodality originates from the separation of precipitation process between resolved grid-scale and parameterized subgrid-scale. However, in a larger number of models bimodality arises from the parameterized subgrid-scale convective precipitation alone.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Statistically bias-corrected and downscaled climate models underestimate the adverse effects of extreme heat on U.S. maize yields

Abstract Efforts to understand and quantify how a changing climate can impact agriculture often rely on bias-corrected and downscaled climate information, making it important to quantify potential biases of this approach. Here, we use a multi-model ensemble of statistically bias-corrected and downscaled climate models, as well as the corresponding parent models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5), to drive a statistical panel model of U.S. maize yields that incorporates season-wide measures of temperature and precipitation. We analyze uncertainty in annual yield hindcasts, finding that the CMIP5 models considerably overestimate historical yield variability while the bias-corrected and downscaled versions underestimate the largest weather-induced yield declines. We also find large differences in projected yields and other decision-relevant metrics throughout this century, leaving stakeholders with modeling choices that require navigating trade-offs in resolution, historical accuracy, and projection confidence.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Evaluating Climate Models with the CLIVAR 2020 ENSO Metrics Package

El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is the dominant mode of interannual climate variability on the planet, with far-reaching global impacts. It is therefore key to evaluate ENSO simulations in state-of-the-art numerical models used to study past, present, and future climate. Recently, the Pacific Region Panel of the International Climate and Ocean: Variability, Predictability and Change (CLIVAR) Project, as a part of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP), led a community-wide effort to evaluate the simulation of ENSO variability, teleconnections, and processes in climate models. The new CLIVAR 2020 ENSO metrics package enables model diagnosis, comparison, and evaluation to 1) highlight aspects that need improvement; 2) monitor progress across model generations; 3) help in selecting models that are well suited for particular analyses; 4) reveal links between various model biases, illuminating the impacts of those biases on ENSO and its sensitivity to climate change; and to 5) advance ENSO literacy. By interfacing with existing model evaluation tools, the ENSO metrics package enables rapid analysis of multipetabyte databases of simulations, such as those generated by the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phases 5 (CMIP5) and 6 (CMIP6). The CMIP6 models are found to significantly outperform those from CMIP5 for 8 out of 24 ENSO-relevant metrics, with most CMIP6 models showing improved tropical Pacific seasonality and ENSO teleconnections. Only one ENSO metric is significantly degraded in CMIP6, namely, the coupling between the ocean surface and subsurface temperature anomalies, while the majority of metrics remain unchanged.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Evaluating Diurnal and Semi-Diurnal Cycle of Precipitation in CMIP6 Models Using Satellite- and Ground-Based Observations

We report the diurnal and semi-diurnal cycle of precipitation simulated from CMIP6 models during 1996-2005 are evaluated globally between 60°S and 60°N, as well as at ten selected locations representing three categories of diurnal cycle of precipitation: (1) afternoon precipitation over land, (2) early morning precipitation over ocean, and (3) nocturnal precipitation over land. Three satellite-based and two ground-based rainfall products are used to evaluate the climate models. Globally, the ensemble mean of CMIP6 models shows a diurnal phase of 3 to 4 hours earlier over land and 1 to 2 hours earlier over ocean, when compared with the latest satellite products. These biases are in line with what were found in previous versions of climate models but reduced compared to the CMIP5 ensemble mean. Analysis at the selected locations complimented with in-situ measurements further reinforces these results. Several CMIP6 models have shown a significant improvement in the diurnal cycle of precipitation compared to their CMIP5 counterparts, notably on delaying afternoon precipitation over land. This can be attributed to the use of more sophisticated convective parameterizations. Most models are still unable to capture the nocturnal peak associated with elevated convection and propagating mesoscale convective systems, with a few exceptions that allow convection to be initiated above the boundary layer to capture nocturnal elevated convection. We also quantify an encouraging consistency between the satellite- and ground-based precipitation measurements despite differing spatiotemporal resolutions and sampling periods, which provides confidence in using them to evaluate the diurnal and semi-diurnal cycle of precipitation in climate models.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Benchmarking Simulated Precipitation Variability Amplitude across Time Scales

Here, objective performance metrics that measure precipitation variability across time scales from subdaily to interannual are presented and applied to Historical simulations of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 and 6 (CMIP5 and CMIP6) models. Three satellite-based precipitation estimates (IMERG, TRMM, and CMORPH) are used as reference data. We apply two independent methods to estimate temporal variability of precipitation and compare the consistency in their results. The first method is derived from power spectra analysis of 3-hourly precipitation, measuring forced variability by solar insolation (diurnal and annual cycles) and internal variability at different time scales (subdaily, synoptic, subseasonal, seasonal, and interannual). The second method is based on time averaging and facilitates estimating the seasonality of subdaily variability. Supporting the robustness of our metric, we find a near equivalence between the results obtained from the two methods when examining simulated-to-observed ratios over large domains (global, tropics, extratropics, land, or ocean). Additionally, we demonstrate that our model evaluation is not very sensitive to the discrepancies between observations. Our results reveal that CMIP5 and CMIP6 models in general overestimate the forced variability while they underestimate the internal variability, especially in the tropical ocean and higher-frequency variability. The underestimation of subdaily variability is consistent across different seasons. The internal variability is overall improved in CMIP6, but remains underestimated, and there is little evidence of improvement in forced variability. Increased horizontal resolution results in some improvement of internal variability at subdaily and synoptic time scales, but not at longer time scales.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Effective radiative forcing and adjustments in CMIP6 models

Abstract. The effective radiative forcing, which includes the instantaneous forcing plus adjustments from the atmosphere and surface, has emerged as the key metric of evaluating human and natural influence on the climate. We evaluate effective radiative forcing and adjustments in 17 contemporary climate models that are participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) and have contributed to the Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (RFMIP). Present-day (2014) global-mean anthropogenic forcing relative to pre-industrial (1850) levels from climate models stands at 2.00 (±0.23) W m−2, comprised of 1.81 (±0.09) W m−2 from CO2, 1.08 (± 0.21) W m−2 from other well-mixed greenhouse gases, −1.01 (± 0.23) W m−2 from aerosols and −0.09 (±0.13) W m−2 from land use change. Quoted uncertainties are 1 standard deviation across model best estimates, and 90 % confidence in the reported forcings, due to internal variability, is typically within 0.1 W m−2. The majority of the remaining 0.21 W m−2 is likely to be from ozone. In most cases, the largest contributors to the spread in effective radiative forcing (ERF) is from the instantaneous radiative forcing (IRF) and from cloud responses, particularly aerosol–cloud interactions to aerosol forcing. As determined in previous studies, cancellation of tropospheric and surface adjustments means that the stratospherically adjusted radiative forcing is approximately equal to ERF for greenhouse gas forcing but not for aerosols, and consequentially, not for the anthropogenic total. The spread of aerosol forcing ranges from −0.63 to −1.37 W m−2, exhibiting a less negative mean and narrower range compared to 10 CMIP5 models. The spread in 4×CO2 forcing has also narrowed in CMIP6 compared to 13 CMIP5 models. Aerosol forcing is uncorrelated with climate sensitivity. Therefore, there is no evidence to suggest that the increasing spread in climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models, particularly related to high-sensitivity models, is a consequence of a stronger negative present-day aerosol forcing and little evidence that modelling groups are systematically tuning climate sensitivity or aerosol forcing to recreate observed historical warming.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Projecting Antarctica's contribution to future sea level rise from basal ice shelf melt using linear response functions of 16 ice sheet models (LARMIP-2)

Abstract. The sea level contribution of the Antarctic ice sheet constitutes a large uncertainty in future sea level projections. Here we apply a linear response theory approach to 16 state-of-the-art ice sheet models to estimate the Antarctic ice sheet contribution from basal ice shelf melting within the 21st century. The purpose of this computation is to estimate the uncertainty of Antarctica's future contribution to global sea level rise that arises from large uncertainty in the oceanic forcing and the associated ice shelf melting. Ice shelf melting is considered to be a major if not the largest perturbation of the ice sheet's flow into the ocean. However, by computing only the sea level contribution in response to ice shelf melting, our study is neglecting a number of processes such as surface-mass-balance-related contributions. In assuming linear response theory, we are able to capture complex temporal responses of the ice sheets, but we neglect any self-dampening or self-amplifying processes. This is particularly relevant in situations in which an instability is dominating the ice loss. The results obtained here are thus relevant, in particular wherever the ice loss is dominated by the forcing as opposed to an internal instability, for example in strong ocean warming scenarios. In order to allow for comparison the methodology was chosen to be exactly the same as in an earlier study (Levermann et al., 2014) but with 16 instead of 5 ice sheet models. We include uncertainty in the atmospheric warming response to carbon emissions (full range of CMIP5 climate model sensitivities), uncertainty in the oceanic transport to the Southern Ocean (obtained from the time-delayed and scaled oceanic subsurface warming in CMIP5 models in relation to the global mean surface warming), and the observed range of responses of basal ice shelf melting to oceanic warming outside the ice shelf cavity. This uncertainty in basal ice shelf melting is then convoluted with the linear response functions of each of the 16 ice sheet models to obtain the ice flow response to the individual global warming path. The model median for the observational period from 1992 to 2017 of the ice loss due to basal ice shelf melting is 10.2 mm, with a likely range between 5.2 and 21.3 mm. For the same period the Antarctic ice sheet lost mass equivalent to 7.4 mm of global sea level rise, with a standard deviation of 3.7 mm (Shepherd et al., 2018) including all processes, especially surface-mass-balance changes. For the unabated warming path, Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP8.5), we obtain a median contribution of the Antarctic ice sheet to global mean sea level rise from basal ice shelf melting within the 21st century of 17 cm, with a likely range (66th percentile around the mean) between 9 and 36 cm and a very likely range (90th percentile around the mean) between 6 and 58 cm. For the RCP2.6 warming path, which will keep the global mean temperature below 2 ∘C of global warming and is thus consistent with the Paris Climate Agreement, the procedure yields a median of 13 cm of global mean sea level contribution. The likely range for the RCP2.6 scenario is between 7 and 24 cm, and the very likely range is between 4 and 37 cm. The structural uncertainties in the method do not allow for an interpretation of any higher uncertainty percentiles. We provide projections for the five Antarctic regions and for each model and each scenario separately. The rate of sea level contribution is highest under the RCP8.5 scenario. The maximum within the 21st century of the median value is 4 cm per decade, with a likely range between 2 and 9 cm per decade and a very likely range between 1 and 14 cm per decade.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Harmonization of global land use change and management for the period 850–2100 (LUH2) for CMIP6

Abstract. Human land use activities have resulted in large changes to the biogeochemical and biophysical properties of the Earth's surface, with consequences for climate and other ecosystem services. In the future, land use activities are likely to expand and/or intensify further to meet growing demands for food, fiber, and energy. As part of the World Climate Research Program Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), the international community has developed the next generation of advanced Earth system models (ESMs) to estimate the combined effects of human activities (e.g., land use and fossil fuel emissions) on the carbon–climate system. A new set of historical data based on the History of the Global Environment database (HYDE), and multiple alternative scenarios of the future (2015–2100) from Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) teams, is required as input for these models. With most ESM simulations for CMIP6 now completed, it is important to document the land use patterns used by those simulations. Here we present results from the Land-Use Harmonization 2 (LUH2) project, which smoothly connects updated historical reconstructions of land use with eight new future projections in the format required for ESMs. The harmonization strategy estimates the fractional land use patterns, underlying land use transitions, key agricultural management information, and resulting secondary lands annually, while minimizing the differences between the end of the historical reconstruction and IAM initial conditions and preserving changes depicted by the IAMs in the future. The new approach builds on a similar effort from CMIP5 and is now provided at higher resolution (0.25∘×0.25∘) over a longer time domain (850–2100, with extensions to 2300) with more detail (including multiple crop and pasture types and associated management practices) using more input datasets (including Landsat remote sensing data) and updated algorithms (wood harvest and shifting cultivation); it is assessed via a new diagnostic package. The new LUH2 products contain > 50 times the information content of the datasets used in CMIP5 and are designed to enable new and improved estimates of the combined effects of land use on the global carbon–climate system.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2015

Sensitivity to Factors Underlying the Hiatus

Recent trends in global mean surface air temperature fall outside the 90 range predicted by models using the CMIP5 forcings and scenarios; this recent period of muted warming is dubbed the hiatus. The hiatus has attracted broad attention in both the popular press and the scientific literature, primarily because of its perceived implications for understanding long-term trends. Many hypotheses have been offered to explain the warming slowdown during the hiatus, and comprehensive studies of this period across multiple variables and spatial scales will likely improve our understanding of the physical mechanisms driving global temperature change and variability.We argue, however, that decadal temperature trends by themselves are unlikely to constrain future trajectories of global mean temperature and that the hiatus does not significantly revise our understanding of overall climate sensitivity. Instead, we demonstrate that, because of the poorly constrained nature of the hiatus, model-observation disagreements over this period may be resolvable via uncertainties in the observations, modeled internal variability, forcing estimates, or (more likely) some combination of all three factors. We define the hiatus interval as 1998-2012, endpoints judiciously chosen to minimize observed warming by including the large 1998 El Nio event and excluding 2014, an exceptionally warm year. Such choices are fundamentally subjective and cannot be considered random, so any probabilistic statements regarding the likelihood of this occurring need to be made carefully. Using this definition, the observed global temperature trend estimates from four datasets fall outside the 5-95 interval predicted by the CMIP5 models. Here we explore some of the plausible explanations for this discrepancy, and show that no unique explanation is likely to fully account for the hiatus.

trends↗