Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (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.

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

At least 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Exploiting SMILEs and the CMIP5 Archive to Understand Arctic Climate Change Seasonality and Uncertainty

Arctic Amplification (AA) exhibits a distinct seasonal dependence; it is weakest in boreal summer and strongest in winter. Here, we analyze simulations from single-model initial-condition large ensembles and Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 to decipher the seasonal evolution of Arctic climate change. Models agree that the annual maximum AA shifts from autumn into winter over the 21st century, accompanied by similar shifts in sea-ice loss and surface turbulent heat fluxes, whereas the maximum precipitation shifts only into late autumn. However, the exact seasonal timing and magnitude of these shifts are highly uncertain. Decomposing the uncertainty into model structural differences, emission scenarios, and internal variability reveals that model differences dominate the total uncertainty, which also undergo autumn-to-winter shifts. We also find that the scenario uncertainty is unimportant for projections of AA. These results highlight that understanding model differences is critical to reducing uncertainty in projected Arctic climate change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2022

Southern Ocean Solar Reflection Biases in Cmip6 Models Linked to Cloud Phase and Vertical Structure Representations

Over the Southern Ocean (SO, 40˚S-70˚S), climate models have consistently underestimated solar reflection. Here we evaluate the relationship between cloud profiles, cloud phase and radiation over the SO in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) models against Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) and Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO). We find that the lack of solar reflection is slightly improved in CMIP6 models compared to CMIP5’s, attributable to a better representation of cloud fraction and phase. We show that clouds have a different vertical structure and radiative effect south and north of where the 0˚C isotherm meets the surface (~55˚S). Although the models capture the greater vertical extent of clouds south of 55˚S, they fail to reproduce the observed increase in solar reflection, which we pinpoint to cloud phase biases. Increasing CMIP6 supercooled liquid cloud opacity should help reduce their persistent SW biases.

Southern Ocean↗
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↗
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.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Tracking Improvement in Simulated Marine Biogeochemistry Between CMIP5 and CMIP6

Purpose of Review The changes or updates in ocean biogeochemistry component have been mapped between CMIP5 and CMIP6 model versions, and an assessment made of how far these have led to improvements in the simulated mean state of marine biogeochemical models within the current generation of Earth system models (ESMs). Recent Findings The representation of marine biogeochemistry has progressed within the current generation of Earth system models. However, it remains difficult to identify which model updates are responsible for a given improvement. In addition, the full potential of marine biogeochemistry in terms of Earth system interactions and climate feedback remains poorly examined in the current generation of Earth system models. Summary Increasing availability of ocean biogeochemical data, as well as an improved understanding of the underlying processes, allows advances in the marine biogeochemical components of the current generation of ESMs. The present study scrutinizes the extent to which marine biogeochemistry components of ESMs have progressed between the 5th and the 6th phases of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP).

Marine Biogeochemistry↗
DOE OSTI2021

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

Abstract. 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.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Snow Reconciles Observed and Simulated Phase Partitioning and Increases Cloud Feedback

The surprising increase of Earth's climate sensitivity in the most recent coupled model intercomparison project (CMIP) models has been largely attributed to extratropical cloud feedback, which is thought to be driven by greater supercooled water in present-day cloud phase partitioning (CPP). Here, we report that accounting for precipitation in the Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE3 radiation scheme, neglected in more than 60% of CMIP6 and 90% of CMIP5 models, systematically changes its apparent CPP and substantially increases its cloud feedback, consistent with results using CMIP models. Including precipitation in the comparison with cloud–aerosol lidar and infrared pathfinder satellite observations (CALIPSO) measurements and in model radiation schemes is essential to faithfully constrain cloud amount and phase partitioning, and simulate cloud feedbacks. Our findings suggest that making radiation schemes precipitation-aware (missing in most CMIP6 models) should strengthen their positive cloud feedback and further increase their already high mean climate sensitivity.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2021

Snow Reconciles Observed and Simulated Phase Partitioning and Increases Cloud Feedback

The surprising increase of Earth's climate sensitivity in the most recent Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) models has been largely attributed to extratropical cloud feedback, which is thought to be driven by greater supercooled water in present-day cloud phase partitioning (CPP). Here we report that accounting for precipitation in the Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE3 radiation scheme, neglected in more than 60% of CMIP6 and 90% of CMIP5 models, systematically changes its apparent CPP and substantially increases its cloud feedback, consistent with results using CMIP models. Including precipitation in the comparison with Cloud–Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO) measurements and in model radiation schemes is essential to faithfully constrain cloud amount and phase partitioning, and simulate cloud feedbacks. Our findings suggest that making radiation schemes precipitation-aware (missing in most CMIP6 models) should strengthen their positive cloud feedback and further increase their already high mean climate sensitivity.

Earth's climate sensitivity↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2020

The CMIP6 Data Request (DREQ, version 01.00.31)

The data request of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) defines all the quantities from CMIP6 simulations that should be archived. This includes both quantities of general interest needed from most of the CMIP6-endorsed model intercomparison projects (MIPs) and quantities that are more specialized and only of interest to a single endorsed MIP.The complexity of the data request has increased from the early days of model intercomparisons, as has the data volume.In contrast with CMIP5, CMIP6 requires distinct sets of highly tailored variables to be saved from each of the more than 200 experiments.This places new demands on the data request information base and leads to a new requirement for development of software that facilitates automated interrogation of the request and retrieval of its technical specifications.The building blocks and structure of the CMIP6 Data Request (DREQ), which have been constructed to meet these challenges, are described in this paper.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2020

Global Carbon Cycle and Climate Feedbacks in the NASA GISS ModelE2.1

We present results from the NASA GISS ModelE2.1‐G‐CC Earth System Model with coupled climate‐carbon cycle simulations that were submitted to the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) Coupled Climate‐Carbon Cycle MIP (C4MIP). Atmospheric CO2 concentration and carbon budgets for the land and ocean in the historical simulations were generally consistent with observations. Low simulated atmospheric CO2 concentrations during 1850‐1950 were due to excess uptake from prescribed land cover change, which erroneously replaced arid shrublands with higher biomass crops, and assumed high 2004 LAI values in vegetated lands throughout the historical simulation. At the end of the historical period, slightly higher simulated CO2 than observed resulted from the land being an insufficient net carbon sink, despite the net effect of CO2 fertilization and warming‐induced increases to leaf photosynthetic capacity. The global ocean carbon uptake agreed well with the observations with the largest discrepancies in the low latitudes. Future climate projection at 2091‐2100 agreed with CMIP5 models in the northward shift, of temperate deciduous forest climate and expansion across Eurasia along 60 °N latitude, and dramatic regional biome shifts from drying and warming in continental Europe. Carbon feedback parameters were largely similar to the CMIP5 model ensemble. For our model, the variation of land feedback parameters within the uncertainty arises from the fertilization feedback being less sensitive due to lack of increased vegetation growth, and the comparably more negative ocean carbon‐climate feedback is due to the large slowdown of the Atlantic overturning circulation.

Carbon cycle↗
DOE OSTI2020

Context for interpreting equilibrium climate sensitivity and transient climate response from the CMIP6 Earth system models

For the current generation of earth system models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6), the range of equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS, a hypothetical value of global warming at equilibrium for a doubling of CO 2 ) is 1.8°C to 5.6°C, the largest of any generation of models dating to the 1990s. Meanwhile, the range of transient climate response (TCR, the surface temperature warming around the time of CO 2 doubling in a 1% per year CO 2 increase simulation) for the CMIP6 models of 1.7°C (1.3°C to 3.0°C) is only slightly larger than for the CMIP3 and CMIP5 models. Here we review and synthesize the latest developments in ECS and TCR values in CMIP, compile possible reasons for the current values as supplied by the modeling groups, and highlight future directions. Cloud feedbacks and cloud-aerosol interactions are the most likely contributors to the high values and increased range of ECS in CMIP6.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

On the Correspondence Between Atmosphere-Only and Coupled Simulations for Radiative Feedbacks and Forcing From CO 2

Atmosphere-only experiments are widely used to investigate climate feedbacks simulated in more computationally expensive fully coupled global climate model simulations. We confirm that this remains a valid approach by comparing the radiative feedbacks and forcing between coupled and atmosphere-only simulations for the latest models taking part in the 6th phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). For global-mean cloud feedbacks, we find a better than previously known correspondence between these experiments, which applies even to the response of individual cloud properties (amount, altitude, and optical depth) and holds even when considering atmosphere-only simulations of only 1 yr duration. For regional cloud feedbacks, the correspondence between the two experiments is generally present at every geographic location except for the tropical Pacific but takes longer experiments to reveal. For the lapse rate and surface albedo feedbacks, the correspondence between the two experiments is weaker due to the non-uniform warming pattern and loss of sea ice in the coupled experiment. For the across-model relationship between 4xCO 2 effective radiative forcing and feedback, we find a different behavior across experiments in CMIP6 than in CMIP5, casting doubt on the physical significance of previous results that highlighted an anti-correlation between the two quantities. Overall, these results confirm the utility of atmosphere-only experiments particularly to study cloud feedbacks, which are the dominant source of inter-model spread in climate sensitivity.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Tracking Improvement in Simulated Marine Biogeochemistry Between CMIP5 and CMIP6

The changes or updates in ocean biogeochemistry component have been mapped between CMIP5 and CMIP6 model versions, and an assessment made of how far these have led to improvements in the simulated mean state of marine biogeochemical models within the current generation of Earth system models (ESMs). The representation of marine biogeochemistry has progressed within the current generation of Earth system models. However, it remains difficult to identify which model updates are responsible for a given improvement. In addition, the full potential of marine biogeochemistry in terms of Earth system interactions and climate feedback remains poorly examined in the current generation of Earth system models. Increasing availability of ocean biogeochemical data, as well as an improved understanding of the underlying processes, allows advances in the marine biogeochemical components of the current generation of ESMs. The present study scrutinizes the extent to which marine biogeochemistry components of ESMs have progressed between the 5th and the 6th phases of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2020

Twenty‐First Century Drought Projections in the CMIP6 Forcing Scenarios

There is strong evidence climate change will increase drought risk and severity, but these conclusions depend on the regions, seasons, and drought metrics being considered. We analyze changes in drought across the hydrologic cycle (precipitation, soil moisture, and runoff) in projections from Phase Six of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). The multi‐model ensemble shows robust drying in the mean state across many regions and metrics by the end of the 21st century, even following the more aggressive mitigation pathways (SSP1‐2.6 and SSP2‐4.5). Regional hotspots with strong drying include western North America, Central America, Europe and the Mediterranean, the Amazon, southern Africa, China, Southeast Asia, and Australia. Compared to SSP3‐7.0 and SSP5‐8.5, however, the severity of drying in the lower warming scenarios is substantially reduced and further precipitation declines in many regions are avoided. Along with drying in the mean state, the risk of the historically most extreme drought events also increases with warming, by 200–300% in some regions. Soil moisture and runoff drying in CMIP6 is more robust, spatially extensive, and severe than precipitation, indicating an important role for other temperature‐sensitive drought processes, including evapotranspiration and snow. Given the similarity in drought responses between CMIP5 and CMIP6, we speculate both generations of models are subject to similar uncertainties, including vegetation processes, model representations of precipitation, and the degree to which model responses to warming are consistent with observations. These topics should be further explored to evaluate whether CMIP6 models offer reasons to have increased confidence in drought projections.

drought↗
NASA NTRS2013

Simulations of the Mid-Pliocene Warm Period Using Two Versions of the NASA-GISS ModelE2-R Coupled Model

The mid-Pliocene Warm Period (mPWP) bears many similarities to aspects of future global warming as projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007). Both marine and terrestrial data point to high-latitude temperature amplification, including large decreases in sea ice and land ice, as well as expansion of warmer climate biomes into higher latitudes. Here we present our most recent simulations of the mid-Pliocene climate using the CMIP5 version of the NASAGISS Earth System Model (ModelE2-R). We describe the substantial impact associated with a recent correction made in the implementation of the Gent-McWilliams ocean mixing scheme (GM), which has a large effect on the simulation of ocean surface temperatures, particularly in the North Atlantic Ocean. The effect of this correction on the Pliocene climate results would not have been easily determined from examining its impact on the preindustrial runs alone, a useful demonstration of how the consequences of code improvements as seen in modern climate control runs do not necessarily portend the impacts in extreme climates.Both the GM-corrected and GM-uncorrected simulations were contributed to the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP) Experiment 2. Many findings presented here corroborate results from other PlioMIP multi-model ensemble papers, but we also emphasize features in the ModelE2-R simulations that are unlike the ensemble means. The corrected version yields results that more closely resemble the ocean core data as well as the PRISM3D reconstructions of the mid-Pliocene, especially the dramatic warming in the North Atlantic and Greenland-Iceland-Norwegian Sea, which in the new simulation appears to be far more realistic than previously found with older versions of the GISS model. Our belief is that continued development of key physical routines in the atmospheric model, along with higher resolution and recent corrections to mixing parameterisations in the ocean model, have led to an Earth System Model that will produce more accurate projections of future climate.

climate change↗
DOE OSTI2020

Evaluation of historical CMIP6 model simulations of extreme precipitation over contiguous US regions

Simulated historical precipitation is evaluated for Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) models using precipitation indices defined by the Expert Team on Climate Change Detection and Indices. The model indices are evaluated against corresponding indices from the CPC unified gauge-based analyses of precipitation over seven geographical regions across the contiguous US (CONUS). The regions assessed match those in recent US National Climate Assessment Reports. To estimate observational uncertainty, precipitation indices for three other observational datasets (HadEx2, Livneh and PRISM) are evaluated against the CPC analyses. Both the moderate and extreme mean precipitation intensities are overestimated over the western CONUS and underestimated in the areas of the Central Great Plains (CGP) in most CMIP6 models tested. Most CMIP6 models overestimate the mean and variability of wet spell durations and underestimate the mean and variability of dry spell durations across the CONUS. Biases in interannual variability of most of the indices have similar patterns to those in corresponding mean biases. The median and interquartile model spreads in CMIP6 model biases are clearly smaller than those in CMIP5 model biases for wet spell durations. Multimodel medians of CMIP6 (CMIP6-MMM) and CMIP5 (CMIP5-MMM) have similar biases in climatology and variability but biases tend to be smaller in CMIP6-MMM. Depending on the index, extreme precipitation is slightly better in parts of the eastern half of the CONUS in CMIP6-MMM, otherwise, the biases in climatology and variability are similar to CMIP5-MMM. CMIP6-MMM performs better than individual models and even observational datasets in some cases. Differences between observational datasets for most indices are comparable to the CMIP6 interquartile model spread. The better-performing observational and model datasets are different in different parts of the CONUS.

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

Evaluation of Global Fire Simulations in CMIP6 Earth System Models

Fire is the primary form of terrestrial ecosystem disturbance on a global scale and an important Earth system process. Most Earth system models (ESMs) have incorporated fire modeling, with 19 of them submitting model outputs of fire-related variables to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). This study provides the first comprehensive evaluation of CMIP6 historical fire simulations by comparing them with multiple satellite-based products and charcoal-based historical reconstructions. Our results show that most CMIP6 models simulate the present-day global burned area and fire carbon emissions within the range of satellite-based products. They also capture the major features of observed spatial patterns and seasonal cycles, the relationship of fires with precipitation and population density, and the influence of the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) on the interannual variability of tropical fires. Regional fire carbon emissions simulated by the CMIP6 models from 1850 to 2010 generally align with the charcoal-based reconstructions, although there are regional mismatches, such as in southern South America and eastern temperate North America prior to the 1910s and in temperate North America, eastern boreal North America, Europe, and boreal Asia since the 1980s. The CMIP6 simulations have addressed three critical issues identified in CMIP5: (1) the simulated global burned area being less than half of that of the observations, (2) the failure to reproduce the high burned area fraction observed in Africa, and (3) the weak fire seasonal variability. Furthermore, the CMIP6 models exhibit improved accuracy in capturing the observed relationship between fires and both climatic and socioeconomic drivers and better align with the historical long-term trends indicated by charcoal-based reconstructions in most regions worldwide. However, the CMIP6 models still fail to reproduce the decline in global burned area and fire carbon emissions observed over the past 2 decades, mainly attributed to an underestimation of anthropogenic fire suppression, and the spring peak in fires in the Northern Hemisphere midlatitudes, mainly due to an underestimation of crop fires. In addition, the model underestimates the fire sensitivity to wet–dry conditions, indicating the need to improve fuel wet-ness estimation. Based on these findings, we present specific guidance for fire scheme development and suggest a postprocessing methodology for using CMIP6 multi-model outputs to generate reliable fire projection products.

Wildfire, Earth system models↗