Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Arctic Amplification”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2022

Potential Link Between Ice Nucleation and Climate Model Spread in Arctic Amplification

Arctic amplification (AA) is simulated by all global climate models, however the spread in the degree of projected warming is large and the underlying mechanisms driving it are poorly understood. The impact of the temperature dependence of immersion freezing on cloud feedbacks and AA is studied using NASA's GEOS-5 model. Parameterizations that exhibit low ice-nucleating particle (INP) concentrations in the high Arctic during summer are found to weaken the cloud-phase feedback. This allows sunlight to readily melt sea-ice in the summer, which decreases the stability of the lower troposphere, causing a decrease in wintertime cloud fraction over open ocean. Arctic amplification was found to span from ∼1.4 to >2.6, which spans 30% of the spread in AA in the coupled model intercomparison project models, depending on the temperature dependence of immersion freezing. These results suggest that summertime INP concentrations may provide an observational constraint on AA.

Ice Nucleation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cross-Scale and Cross-Interface Processes and Arctic Amplification

The Arctic is a dynamic region, demonstrated by its remarkable internal variability and rapid response to anthropogenic climate change over the last 40 years. Actionable predictions and projections hold significant value for managing both natural and human systems. The value of these model outputs only grows in a warmer, less icy Arctic. However, substantial gaps exist in our understanding of cross-scale and cross-interface (air-sea ice-ocean) interactions that limit our predictive capabilities. Studies dating back at least 40 years provide evidence that the evolution of the Arctic climate system is sensitive to these cross-scale and cross-interface interactions. This presentation summarizes our understanding of cross-scale and cross-interface interactions relevant to the Arctic’s response to anthropogenic climate change—Arctic Amplification. The presentation emphasizes the influence of surface-type dependent turbulent flux exchanges of heat and moisture, the rectification of episodic atmospheric heat transport events on time-averaged changes, local and remote feedback interactions, and cross-seasonal energy transfers. The presentation concludes with a summary of knowledge gaps and discusses potential pathways for accelerating our understanding of the Arctic climate system.

Patrick C. Taylor↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Importance of Cross-Scale and Cross-Interface Processes on Arctic Amplification

The Arctic is a dynamic region, demonstrated by its remarkable internal variability and rapid response to anthropogenic climate change over the last >40 years. Actionable predictions and projections hold significant value for managing both natural and human systems. The value of these model outputs only grows in a warmer, less icy Arctic. However, substantial gaps exist in our understanding of cross-scale and cross-interface (air-sea ice-ocean) interactions that limit our predictive capabilities. Studies dating back at least 40 years provide evidence that the evolution of the Arctic climate system is sensitive to these cross-scale and cross-interface interactions. This presentation summarizes our understanding of cross-scale and cross-interface interactions relevant to the Arctic’s response to anthropogenic climate change—Arctic Amplification. The presentation emphasizes the influence of surface-type dependent turbulent flux exchanges of heat and moisture, the rectification of episodic atmospheric heat transport events on time-averaged changes, local and remote feedback interactions, and cross-seasonal energy transfers. The presentation concludes with a summary of knowledge gaps and discusses potential pathways for accelerating our understanding of the Arctic climate system.

Patrick C Taylor↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cross-Scale and Cross-Interface Processes and Arctic Amplification

The Arctic is a dynamic region, demonstrated by its remarkable internal variability and rapid response to anthropogenic climate change over the last >40 years. Actionable predictions and projections hold significant value for managing both natural and human systems. The value of these model outputs only grows in a warmer, less icy Arctic. However, substantial gaps exist in our understanding of cross-scale and cross-interface (air-sea ice-ocean) interactions that limit our predictive capabilities. Studies dating back at least 40 years provide evidence that the evolution of the Arctic climate system is sensitive to these cross-scale and cross-interface interactions. This presentation summarizes our understanding of cross-scale and cross-interface interactions relevant to the Arctic’s response to anthropogenic climate change—Arctic Amplification. The presentation emphasizes the influence of surface-type dependent turbulent flux exchanges of heat and moisture, the rectification of episodic atmospheric heat transport events on time-averaged changes, local and remote feedback interactions, and cross-seasonal energy transfers. The presentation concludes with a summary of knowledge gaps and discusses potential pathways for accelerating our understanding of the Arctic climate system.

Patrick C. Taylor↗
NASA NTRS2017

Contributions of Mixed-Phase Clouds to Reduced Arctic Amplification

Earth’s Arctic is particularly sensitive to global warming. The climate record shows that Arctic changes in surface temperatures far exceed that of the global mean, a phenomenon referred to as Arctic amplification. Here, we show that warming of the Arctic atmosphere causes mixed-phase clouds in the region to contain less ice and more supercooled liquid, which in turn tends to increase their amount and thick- ness, thereby inducing a positive feedback mainly by increasing downward longwave (LW) radiation at the surface. The increased downward LW radiation decreases the positive lapse rate feedback in the Arctic, thus resulting in reduced Arctic amplification. The strength of this feedback depends on the initial mean-state supercooled liquid fraction (SLF) and the ice crystal effective radii. We also show that reduced precipitation rates can result from large mean-state ice effective radii being replaced by relatively more smaller liquid droplets in the cloud phase feedback, despite having high mean-state SLFs, demonstrating the importance of the representation of cloud microphysics in the Arctic.

Tan, Ivy↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Process drivers, inter-model spread, and a path forward: What do we know about Arctic Amplification?

Over the recent decades, rapid changes have been observed in the Arctic resulting from enhanced surface warming in the Arctic relative to the rest of the globe, a phenomenon called Arctic Amplification. While surface-based amplification of Arctic warming in response to increased CO2 has been established. The driving mechanisms, relevant processes, and the relative roles of local and remote mechanisms to Arctic Amplification remain unclear. Research over the last decade has made it clear that coupling between the atmosphere, sea ice, and ocean play a key role in Arctic Amplification. This presentation summarizes recent research on the fundamental role that atmosphere-sea ice-ocean interactions and energy exchanges play in driving Arctic Amplification, how these interactions manifest as radiative climate feedbacks, and how these processes influence the differences in the projected Arctic climate change across CMIP5 and 6. We hypothesize that models that simulate larger warming do so by generating a larger local atmospheric circulation response that more effectively redistributes energy drawn from the ocean in sea ice retreat regions Arctic-wide and contributing to a larger increase in downwelling long wave radiation. This process is also fundamentally tied to the Arctic lapse rate feedback.

Arctic amplification↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Process Drivers, Inter-model Spread, and a Path Forward: What Do We Know About Arctic Amplification?

Over the recent decades, rapid changes have been observed in the Arctic resulting from enhanced surface warming in the Arctic relative to the rest of the globe, a phenomenon called Arctic Amplification. While surface-based amplification of Arctic warming in response to increased CO2 has been established. The driving mechanisms, relevant processes, and the relative roles of local and remote mechanisms to Arctic Amplification remain unclear. Research over the last decade has made it clear that coupling between the atmosphere, sea ice, and ocean play a key role in Arctic Amplification. This presentation summarizes recent research on the fundamental role that atmosphere-sea ice-ocean interactions and energy exchanges play in driving Arctic Amplification, how these interactions manifest as radiative climate feedbacks, and how these processes influence the differences in the projected Arctic climate change across CMIP5 and 6. We hypothesize that models that simulate larger warming do so by generating a larger local atmospheric circulation response that more effectively redistributes energy drawn from the ocean in sea ice retreat regions Arctic-wide and contributing to a larger increase in downwelling long wave radiation. This process is also fundamentally tied to the Arctic lapse rate feedback.

Patrick Charles Taylor↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Process drivers, inter-model spread, and a path forward: What do we know about Arctic Amplification?

Over the recent decades, rapid changes have been observed in the Arctic resulting from enhanced surface warming in the Arctic relative to the rest of the globe, a phenomenon called Arctic Amplification. While surface-based amplification of Arctic warming in response to increased CO2 has been established. The driving mechanisms, relevant processes, and the relative roles of local and remote mechanisms to Arctic Amplification remain unclear. Research over the last decade has made it clear that coupling between the atmosphere, sea ice, and ocean play a key role in Arctic Amplification. This presentation summarizes recent research on the fundamental role that atmosphere-sea ice-ocean interactions and energy exchanges play in driving Arctic Amplification, how these interactions manifest as radiative climate feedbacks, and how these processes influence the differences in the projected Arctic climate change across CMIP5 and 6. We hypothesize that models that simulate larger warming do so by generating a larger local atmospheric circulation response that more effectively redistributes energy drawn from the ocean in sea ice retreat regions Arctic-wide and contributing to a larger increase in downwelling long wave radiation. This process is also fundamentally tied to the Arctic lapse rate feedback.

Patrick C. Taylor↗
DOE OSTI2026

The Role of Internal Variability in Springtime Arctic Amplification from 1980 to 2022

Arctic amplification (AA) refers to the enhanced warming of the Arctic relative to the global average due to rising greenhouse gases, measured as the ratio of Arctic-mean to global-mean surface air temperature (SAT) trends. From 1980 to 2022, annual-mean AA reached 4.2 (Arctic defined as north of 70°N). Climate models simulate AA but fail to reproduce its magnitude. Sweeney et al. attributed much of this model–observation discrepancy to internal variability. AA shows seasonality and so does the discrepancy. Spring (March–May) shows the largest gap: Observed AA is 4.2, while the multimodel mean is 2.7. This raises several questions: 1) What role does internal variability play in observed spring AA? 2) How does simulated spring AA compare to observations when internal variability is removed? 3) If internal variability is significant, what mechanisms drive it? To address these, we adapted the machine learning algorithm from Sweeney et al., training on simulated multidecadal spring SAT and sea level pressure (SLP) trend maps. Our results show that internal variability enhanced spring Arctic warming by 37% and reduced global warming by 10%. Removing internal variability reconciles the spring AA discrepancy. The estimated internal contribution to Arctic spring warming is supported by an independent dynamical adjustment approach. We identify an atmospheric circulation pattern in observations associated with this internal warming. Observed internal Siberian SAT and SLP trends follow the simulated SAT–SLP relationship but lie at the distribution’s extreme, suggesting models generally underestimate internal variability unless the observed configuration reflects a rare real-world realization.

Arctic↗
DOE OSTI2025

Mid-latitude clouds contribute to Arctic amplification via interactions with other climate feedbacks

Abstract Traditional feedback analyses, which assume that individual climate feedback mechanisms act independently and add linearly, suggest that clouds do not contribute to Arctic amplification. However, feedback locking experiments, in which the cloud feedback is disabled, suggest that clouds, particularly outside of the Arctic, do contribute to Arctic amplification. Here, we reconcile these two perspectives by introducing a framework that quantifies the interactions between radiative feedbacks, radiative forcing, ocean heat uptake, and atmospheric heat transport. We show that including the cloud feedback in a comprehensive climate model can result in Arctic amplification because of interactions with other radiative feedbacks. The surface temperature change associated with including the cloud feedback is amplified in the Arctic by the surface-albedo, Planck, and lapse-rate feedbacks. A moist energy balance model with a locked cloud feedback exhibits similar behavior as the comprehensive climate model with a disabled cloud feedback and further indicates that the mid-latitude cloud feedback contributes to Arctic amplification via feedback interactions. Feedback locking in the moist energy balance model also suggests that the mid-latitude cloud feedback contributes substantially to the intermodel spread in Arctic amplification across comprehensive climate models. These results imply that constraining the mid-latitude cloud feedback will greatly reduce the intermodel spread in Arctic amplification. Furthermore, these results highlight a previously unrecognized non-local pathway for Arctic amplification.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2021

Quantifying the role of ocean coupling in Arctic amplification and sea-ice loss over the 21st century

The enhanced warming of the Arctic, relative to other parts of the Earth, a phenomenon known as Arctic amplification, is one of the most striking features of climate change, and has important climatic impacts for the entire Northern Hemisphere. Several mechanisms are believed to be responsible for Arctic amplification; however, a quantitative understanding of their relative importance is still missing. Here, using ensembles of model integrations, we quantify the contribution of ocean coupling, both its thermodynamic and dynamic components, to Arctic amplification over the 20th and 21st centuries. We show that ocean coupling accounts for ~80% of the amplification by 2100. In particular, we show that thermodynamic coupling is responsible for future amplification and sea-ice loss as it overcomes the effect of dynamic coupling which reduces the amplification and sea-ice loss by ~35%. Our results demonstrate the utility of targeted numerical experiments to quantify the role of specific mechanisms in Arctic amplification, for better constraining climate projections.

Ocean heat transport↗
NASA NTRS2019

Arctic Amplification Response to Individual Climate Drivers

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

greenhouse gases↗
DOE OSTI2024

Assessing Radiative Feedbacks and Their Contribution to the Arctic Amplification Measured by Various Metrics

Arctic amplification (AA), characterized by a more rapid surface air temperature (SAT) warming in the Arctic than the global average, is a major feature of global climate warming. Various metrics have been used to quantify AA based on SAT anomalies, trends, or variability, and they can yield quite different conclusions regarding the magnitude and temporal patterns of AA. This study examines and compares various AA metrics for their temporal consistency in the region north of 70°N from the early twentieth to the early 21st century using observational data and reanalysis products. We also quantify contributions of different radiative feedback mechanisms to AA based on short-term climate variability in reanalysis and model data using the Kernel-Gregory approach. Albedo and lapse rate feedbacks are positive and comparable, with albedo feedback being the leading contributor for all AA metrics. The net cloud feedback, which has large uncertainties, depends strongly on the data sets and AA metrics used. By quantifying the influence of internal variability on AA and related feedbacks based on global climate model ensemble simulations, we find that water vapor and cloud feedbacks are most heavily affected by internal variability.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Extrapolar Cloud Feedbacks as a Driver of Arctic Amplification

The role of cloud feedbacks in Arctic amplification (AA) of anthropogenic warming remains unclear. Traditional feedback analysis diagnoses the net cloud feedback as strongly positive in the tropics but either weak or negative in the Arctic, suggesting that AA would be amplified if cloud feedbacks were suppressed. However, in cloud-locking experiments using the slab ocean version of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM), we find that suppressing cloud feedbacks results in a substantial decrease in AA under greenhouse gas forcing. We show that the increase in AA from cloud feedbacks arises from two main mechanisms: 1) the additional energy contributed by positive cloud feedbacks in the tropics leads to increased poleward moist atmospheric heat transport (AHT) which then amplifies Arctic warming; and 2) the additional Arctic warming is amplified by positive noncloud feedbacks in the region, together making extrapolar cloud feedbacks amplify AA. We also find that cloud changes can modify the strength of noncloud feedback, but that modification has a small effect on Arctic warming. We further examine the role of cloud feedbacks in AA using a moist energy balance model, which demonstrates that interactions of cloud feedbacks with moist AHT and other positive feedbacks dominate the influence of clouds on the pattern of surface warming. However, the contribution of cloud-induced changes in noncloud feedbacks on AA is relatively minor. Furthermore, these results demonstrate that traditional attributions of AA, that are based on local feedback analysis, overlook key interactions between extrapolar cloud changes, poleward AHT, and noncloud feedbacks in the Arctic.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Arctic Amplification: Process Drivers and Sources of Uncertainty

Arctic amplification (AA) is a coupled atmosphere-sea ice-ocean process. This understanding has evolved from the early concept of AA, as a consequence of snow ice line progressions, through more than a century of research that has clarified the relevant processes and driving mechanisms of AA. The predictions made by early modeling studies, namely the fall/winter maximum, bottom-heavy structure, the prominence of surface albedo feedback, and the importance of stable stratification have withstood the scrutiny of multi-decadal observations and more complex models. Yet, the uncertainty in Arctic climate projections is larger than in any other region of the planet, making the assessment of high-impact, near-term regional changes difficult or impossible. Reducing this large spread in Arctic climate projections requires a quantitative process understanding. This presentation synthesizes current knowledge of AA and describes a set of recommendations to guide future research. It briefly reviews the history of AA science, summarizes observed Arctic changes, discusses modeling approaches and feedback diagnostics, and assesses the current understanding of the most relevant feedbacks to AA. These sections culminate in a conceptual model of the fundamental physical mechanisms causing AA and a collection of recommendations to accelerate progress towards reduced uncertainty in Arctic climate projections. Our conceptual model highlights the need to account for local feedback and remote process interactions within the context of the annual cycle to constrain projected AA.

Patrick C Taylor↗
NASA NTRS2023

Summer Atmospheric Circulation Over Greenland in Response to Arctic Amplification and Diminished Spring Snow Cover

The exceptional atmospheric conditions that have accelerated Greenland Ice Sheet mass loss in recent decades have been repeatedly recognized as a possible dynamical response to Arctic amplification. Here, we present evidence of two potentially synergistic mechanisms linking high-latitude warming to the observed increase in Greenland blocking. Consistent with a prominent hypothesis associating Arctic amplification and persistent weather extremes, we show that the summer atmospheric circulation over the North Atlantic has become wavier and link this wavier flow to more prevalent Greenland blocking. While a concomitant decline in terrestrial snow cover has likely contributed to this mechanism by further amplifying warming at high latitudes, we also show that there is a direct stationary Rossby wave response to low spring North American snow cover that enforces an anomalous anticyclone over Greenland, thus helping to anchor the ridge over Greenland in this wavier atmospheric state.

Atmospheric dynamics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

On the Nature of the Arctic’s Positive Lapse-rate Feedback: Cause or Symptom of Arctic Amplification

Radiative energy fluxes exiting the atmosphere towards the surface and to space are sensitive to the vertical structure of temperature. Under anthropogenic forcing, this sensitivity gives rise to the lapse-rate feedback. Shown to be negative in the tropics and positive in the Arctic, studies argue that the lapse-rate feedback is the primary cause of Arctic Amplification. While mechanistically the negative tropical lapse-rate feedback is understood, the mechanics of the positive Arctic lapse-rate feedback are less clear. Previous arguments state that the Arctic’s stable stratification is the origin of its positive lapse-rate feedback. We present results using CMIP5 and CMIP6 model output that arguing that the magnitude, spatial variability, seasonality, and inter-model spread in the Arctic lapse-rate feedback is controlled by surface properties and atmosphere-ocean-sea ice energy exchanges, not the degree of stable stratification. We argue that the Arctic’s positive lapse-rate feedback is a seasonal and regional phenomenon that manifests from local surface characteristics and surface albedo, ice insulation, and thermal inertia feedbacks that cause surface warming to outpace atmospheric warming in sea ice-retreat regions. We view the Arctic’s positive lapse-rate feedback as a symptom rather than the primary cause of Arctic Amplification.

Patrick Charles Taylor↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

On the Nature of the Arctic’s Positive Lapse Rate Feedback Cause or Symptom of Arctic Amplification

Radiative energy fluxes exiting the atmosphere towards the surface and to space are sensitive to the vertical structure of temperature. Under anthropogenic forcing, this sensitivity gives rise to the lapse-rate feedback. Shown to be negative in the tropics and positive in the Arctic, studies argue that the lapse-rate feedback is the primary cause of Arctic Amplification. While mechanistically the negative tropical lapse-rate feedback is understood, the mechanics of the positive Arctic lapse-rate feedback are less clear. Previous arguments state that the Arctic’s stable stratification is the origin of its positive lapse-rate feedback. We present results using CMIP5 and CMIP6 model output that arguing that the magnitude, spatial variability, seasonality, and inter-model spread in the Arctic lapse-rate feedback is controlled by surface properties and atmosphere-ocean-sea ice energy exchanges, not the degree of stable stratification. We argue that the Arctic’s positive lapse-rate feedback is a seasonal and regional phenomenon that manifests from local surface characteristics and surface albedo, ice insulation, and thermal inertia feedbacks that cause surface warming to outpace atmospheric warming in sea ice-retreat regions. We view the Arctic’s positive lapse-rate feedback as a symptom rather than the primary cause of Arctic Amplification.

Patrick C Taylor↗