Articles | Volume 11, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2273-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2273-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Model description paper
| 
18 Jun 2018
Model description paper |
| 18 Jun 2018
| 18 Jun 2018
FAIR v1.3: a simple emissions-based impulse response and carbon cycle model
Christopher J. Smith
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Piers M. Forster
School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Myles Allen
Atmospheric Physics Department, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Nicholas Leach
Atmospheric Physics Department, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Richard J. Millar
College of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Giovanni A. Passerello
School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Leighton A. Regayre
School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Related authors
Camilla Mathison, Eleanor J. Burke, Gregory Munday, Chris D. Jones, Chris J. Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Andy J. Wiltshire, Chris Huntingford, Eszter Kovacs, Laila K. Gohar, Rebecca M. Varney, and Douglas McNeall
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1785–1808, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present PRIME (Probabilistic Regional Impacts from Model patterns and Emissions), which is designed to take new emissions scenarios and rapidly provide regional impact information. PRIME allows large ensembles to be run on multi-centennial timescales, including the analysis of many important variables for impact assessments. Our evaluation shows that PRIME reproduces the climate response for known scenarios, providing confidence in using PRIME for novel scenarios.
Detlef van Vuuren, Brian O'Neill, Claudia Tebaldi, Louise Chini, Pierre Friedlingstein, Tomoko Hasegawa, Keywan Riahi, Benjamin Sanderson, Bala Govindasamy, Nico Bauer, Veronika Eyring, Cheikh Fall, Katja Frieler, Matthew Gidden, Laila Gohar, Andrew Jones, Andrew King, Reto Knutti, Elmar Kriegler, Peter Lawrence, Chris Lennard, Jason Lowe, Camila Mathison, Shahbaz Mehmood, Luciana Prado, Qiang Zhang, Steven Rose, Alexander Ruane, Carl-Friederich Schleussner, Roland Seferian, Jana Sillmann, Chris Smith, Anna Sörensson, Swapna Panickal, Kaoru Tachiiri, Naomi Vaughan, Saritha Vishwanathan, Tokuta Yokohata, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a set of six plausible 21st century emission scenarios, and their multi-century extensions, that will be used by the international community of climate modeling centers to produce the next generation of climate projections. These projections will support climate, impact and mitigation researchers, provide information to practitioners to address future risks from climate change, and contribute to policymakers’ considerations of the trade-offs among various levels of mitigation.
Magali Verkerk, Thomas J. Aubry, Christopher Smith, Peter O. Hopcroft, Michael Sigl, Jessica E. Tierney, Kevin Anchukaitis, Matthew Osman, Anja Schmidt, and Matthew Toohey
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3635, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3635, 2024
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Climate of the Past (CP).
Short summary
Short summary
Large volcanic eruptions can trigger global cooling, affecting human societies. Using ice-core records and simple climate model to simulate volcanic effect over the last 8500 years, we show that volcanic eruptions cool climate by 0.12 °C on average. By comparing model results with temperature recorded by tree rings over the last 1000 years, we demonstrate that our models can predict the large-scale cooling caused by volcanic eruptions, and can be used in case of large eruption in the future.
Chris Smith, Donald P. Cummins, Hege-Beate Fredriksen, Zebedee Nicholls, Malte Meinshausen, Myles Allen, Stuart Jenkins, Nicholas Leach, Camilla Mathison, and Antti-Ilari Partanen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8569–8592, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate projections are only useful if the underlying models that produce them are well calibrated and can reproduce observed climate change. We formalise a software package that calibrates the open-source FaIR simple climate model to full-complexity Earth system models. Observations, including historical warming, and assessments of key climate variables such as that of climate sensitivity are used to constrain the model output.
Benjamin M. Sanderson, Ben B. B. Booth, John Dunne, Veronika Eyring, Rosie A. Fisher, Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew J. Gidden, Tomohiro Hajima, Chris D. Jones, Colin G. Jones, Andrew King, Charles D. Koven, David M. Lawrence, Jason Lowe, Nadine Mengis, Glen P. Peters, Joeri Rogelj, Chris Smith, Abigail C. Snyder, Isla R. Simpson, Abigail L. S. Swann, Claudia Tebaldi, Tatiana Ilyina, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Roland Séférian, Bjørn H. Samset, Detlef van Vuuren, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8141–8172, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We discuss how, in order to provide more relevant guidance for climate policy, coordinated climate experiments should adopt a greater focus on simulations where Earth system models are provided with carbon emissions from fossil fuels together with land use change instructions, rather than past approaches that have largely focused on experiments with prescribed atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. We discuss how these goals might be achieved in coordinated climate modeling experiments.
Benjamin Mark Sanderson, Victor Brovkin, Rosie Fisher, David Hohn, Tatiana Ilyina, Chris Jones, Torben Koenigk, Charles Koven, Hongmei Li, David Lawrence, Peter Lawrence, Spencer Liddicoat, Andrew Macdougall, Nadine Mengis, Zebedee Nicholls, Eleanor O'Rourke, Anastasia Romanou, Marit Sandstad, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Seferian, Lori Sentman, Isla Simpson, Chris Smith, Norman Steinert, Abigail Swann, Jerry Tjiputra, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3356, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3356, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates how climate models warm in response to simplified carbon emissions trajectories, refining understanding of climate reversibility and commitment. Metrics are defined for warming response to cumulative emissions and for the cessation or ramp-down to net-zero and net-negative levels. Results indicate that previous concentration-driven experiments may have overstated zero emissions commitment due to emissions rates exceeding historical levels.
Robert J. Allen, Xueying Zhao, Cynthia A. Randles, Ryan J. Kramer, Bjørn H. Samset, and Christopher J. Smith
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 11207–11226, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11207-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11207-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Present-day methane shortwave absorption mutes 28% (7–55%) of the surface warming associated with its longwave absorption. The precipitation increase associated with the longwave radiative effects of the present-day methane perturbation is also muted by shortwave absorption but not significantly so. Methane shortwave absorption also impacts the magnitude of its climate feedback parameter, largely through the cloud feedback.
Paul T. Griffiths, Laura J. Wilcox, Robert J. Allen, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Michael J. Prather, Alexander T. Archibald, Florence Brown, Makoto Deushi, William Collins, Stephanie Fiedler, Naga Oshima, Lee T. Murray, Christopher J. Smith, Steven T. Turnock, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Paul J. Young
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2528, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2528, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The Aerosol Chemistry Model Intercomparison Project (AerChemMIP) aimed to quantify the climate and air quality impacts of aerosols and chemically reactive gases. In this paper, we review its contribution to AR6, and the wider understanding of the role of these species in climate and climate change. We identify remaining challenges concluding with recommendations aimed to improve the utility and uptake of climate model data to address the role of short-lived climate forcers in the Earth system.
Malte Meinshausen, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Kathleen Beyer, Greg Bodeker, Olivier Boucher, Josep G. Canadell, John S. Daniel, Aïda Diongue-Niang, Fatima Driouech, Erich Fischer, Piers Forster, Michael Grose, Gerrit Hansen, Zeke Hausfather, Tatiana Ilyina, Jarmo S. Kikstra, Joyce Kimutai, Andrew D. King, June-Yi Lee, Chris Lennard, Tabea Lissner, Alexander Nauels, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Gian-Kasper Plattner, Hans Pörtner, Joeri Rogelj, Maisa Rojas, Joyashree Roy, Bjørn H. Samset, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Sonia Seneviratne, Christopher J. Smith, Sophie Szopa, Adelle Thomas, Diana Urge-Vorsatz, Guus J. M. Velders, Tokuta Yokohata, Tilo Ziehn, and Zebedee Nicholls
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4533–4559, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4533-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4533-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The scientific community is considering new scenarios to succeed RCPs and SSPs for the next generation of Earth system model runs to project future climate change. To contribute to that effort, we reflect on relevant policy and scientific research questions and suggest categories for representative emission pathways. These categories are tailored to the Paris Agreement long-term temperature goal, high-risk outcomes in the absence of further climate policy and worlds “that could have been”.
Piers M. Forster, Chris Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Bradley Hall, Mathias Hauser, Aurélien Ribes, Debbie Rosen, Nathan P. Gillett, Matthew D. Palmer, Joeri Rogelj, Karina von Schuckmann, Blair Trewin, Myles Allen, Robbie Andrew, Richard A. Betts, Alex Borger, Tim Boyer, Jiddu A. Broersma, Carlo Buontempo, Samantha Burgess, Chiara Cagnazzo, Lijing Cheng, Pierre Friedlingstein, Andrew Gettelman, Johannes Gütschow, Masayoshi Ishii, Stuart Jenkins, Xin Lan, Colin Morice, Jens Mühle, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel E. Killick, Paul B. Krummel, Jan C. Minx, Gunnar Myhre, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Sophie Szopa, Peter Thorne, Mahesh V. M. Kovilakam, Elisa Majamäki, Jukka-Pekka Jalkanen, Margreet van Marle, Rachel M. Hoesly, Robert Rohde, Dominik Schumacher, Guido van der Werf, Russell Vose, Kirsten Zickfeld, Xuebin Zhang, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2625–2658, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2625-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2625-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper tracks some key indicators of global warming through time, from 1850 through to the end of 2023. It is designed to give an authoritative estimate of global warming to date and its causes. We find that in 2023, global warming reached 1.3 °C and is increasing at over 0.2 °C per decade. This is caused by all-time-high greenhouse gas emissions.
Stephanie Fiedler, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Christopher J. Smith, Paul Griffiths, Ryan J. Kramer, Toshihiko Takemura, Robert J. Allen, Ulas Im, Matthew Kasoar, Angshuman Modak, Steven Turnock, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Duncan Watson-Parris, Daniel M. Westervelt, Laura J. Wilcox, Alcide Zhao, William J. Collins, Michael Schulz, Gunnar Myhre, and Piers M. Forster
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2387–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate scientists want to better understand modern climate change. Thus, climate model experiments are performed and compared. The results of climate model experiments differ, as assessed in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report. This article gives insights into the challenges and outlines opportunities for further improving the understanding of climate change. It is based on views of a group of experts in atmospheric composition–climate interactions.
Robert E. Kopp, Gregory G. Garner, Tim H. J. Hermans, Shantenu Jha, Praveen Kumar, Alexander Reedy, Aimée B. A. Slangen, Matteo Turilli, Tamsin L. Edwards, Jonathan M. Gregory, George Koubbe, Anders Levermann, Andre Merzky, Sophie Nowicki, Matthew D. Palmer, and Chris Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7461–7489, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7461-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7461-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Future sea-level rise projections exhibit multiple forms of uncertainty, all of which must be considered by scientific assessments intended to inform decision-making. The Framework for Assessing Changes To Sea-level (FACTS) is a new software package intended to support assessments of global mean, regional, and extreme sea-level rise. An early version of FACTS supported the development of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report sea-level projections.
Olivia Linke, Johannes Quaas, Finja Baumer, Sebastian Becker, Jan Chylik, Sandro Dahlke, André Ehrlich, Dörthe Handorf, Christoph Jacobi, Heike Kalesse-Los, Luca Lelli, Sina Mehrdad, Roel A. J. Neggers, Johannes Riebold, Pablo Saavedra Garfias, Niklas Schnierstein, Matthew D. Shupe, Chris Smith, Gunnar Spreen, Baptiste Verneuil, Kameswara S. Vinjamuri, Marco Vountas, and Manfred Wendisch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 9963–9992, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9963-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9963-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Lapse rate feedback (LRF) is a major driver of the Arctic amplification (AA) of climate change. It arises because the warming is stronger at the surface than aloft. Several processes can affect the LRF in the Arctic, such as the omnipresent temperature inversion. Here, we compare multimodel climate simulations to Arctic-based observations from a large research consortium to broaden our understanding of these processes, find synergy among them, and constrain the Arctic LRF and AA.
Mark D. Zelinka, Christopher J. Smith, Yi Qin, and Karl E. Taylor
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8879–8898, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The primary uncertainty in how strongly Earth's climate has been perturbed by human activities comes from the unknown radiative impact of aerosol changes. Accurately quantifying these forcings – and their sub-components – in climate models is crucial for understanding the past and future simulated climate. In this study we describe biases in previously published estimates of aerosol radiative forcing in climate models and provide corrected estimates along with code for users to compute them.
Piers M. Forster, Christopher J. Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Mathias Hauser, Aurélien Ribes, Debbie Rosen, Nathan Gillett, Matthew D. Palmer, Joeri Rogelj, Karina von Schuckmann, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Blair Trewin, Xuebin Zhang, Myles Allen, Robbie Andrew, Arlene Birt, Alex Borger, Tim Boyer, Jiddu A. Broersma, Lijing Cheng, Frank Dentener, Pierre Friedlingstein, José M. Gutiérrez, Johannes Gütschow, Bradley Hall, Masayoshi Ishii, Stuart Jenkins, Xin Lan, June-Yi Lee, Colin Morice, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel Killick, Jan C. Minx, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Sophie Szopa, Peter Thorne, Robert Rohde, Maisa Rojas Corradi, Dominik Schumacher, Russell Vose, Kirsten Zickfeld, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 2295–2327, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2295-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2295-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This is a critical decade for climate action, but there is no annual tracking of the level of human-induced warming. We build on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment reports that are authoritative but published infrequently to create a set of key global climate indicators that can be tracked through time. Our hope is that this becomes an important annual publication that policymakers, media, scientists and the public can refer to.
Jarmo S. Kikstra, Zebedee R. J. Nicholls, Christopher J. Smith, Jared Lewis, Robin D. Lamboll, Edward Byers, Marit Sandstad, Malte Meinshausen, Matthew J. Gidden, Joeri Rogelj, Elmar Kriegler, Glen P. Peters, Jan S. Fuglestvedt, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Bjørn H. Samset, Laura Wienpahl, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Kaj-Ivar van der Wijst, Alaa Al Khourdajie, Piers M. Forster, Andy Reisinger, Roberto Schaeffer, and Keywan Riahi
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 9075–9109, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9075-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9075-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing hundreds or thousands of emission scenarios in terms of their global mean temperature implications requires standardised procedures of infilling, harmonisation, and probabilistic temperature assessments. We here present the open-source
climate-assessmentworkflow that was used in the IPCC AR6 Working Group III report. The paper provides key insight for anyone wishing to understand the assessment of climate outcomes of mitigation pathways in the context of the Paris Agreement.
Johannes Quaas, Hailing Jia, Chris Smith, Anna Lea Albright, Wenche Aas, Nicolas Bellouin, Olivier Boucher, Marie Doutriaux-Boucher, Piers M. Forster, Daniel Grosvenor, Stuart Jenkins, Zbigniew Klimont, Norman G. Loeb, Xiaoyan Ma, Vaishali Naik, Fabien Paulot, Philip Stier, Martin Wild, Gunnar Myhre, and Michael Schulz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12221–12239, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12221-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12221-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Pollution particles cool climate and offset part of the global warming. However, they are washed out by rain and thus their effect responds quickly to changes in emissions. We show multiple datasets to demonstrate that aerosol emissions and their concentrations declined in many regions influenced by human emissions, as did the effects on clouds. Consequently, the cooling impact on the Earth energy budget became smaller. This change in trend implies a relative warming.
Nicholas J. Leach, Stuart Jenkins, Zebedee Nicholls, Christopher J. Smith, John Lynch, Michelle Cain, Tristram Walsh, Bill Wu, Junichi Tsutsui, and Myles R. Allen
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3007–3036, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3007-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3007-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents an update of the FaIR simple climate model, which can estimate the impact of anthropogenic greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions on the global climate. This update aims to significantly increase the structural simplicity of the model, making it more understandable and transparent. This simplicity allows it to be implemented in a wide range of environments, including Excel. We suggest that it could be used widely in academia, corporate research, and education.
Gillian Thornhill, William Collins, Dirk Olivié, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Alex Archibald, Susanne Bauer, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Stephanie Fiedler, Gerd Folberth, Ada Gjermundsen, Larry Horowitz, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Martine Michou, Jane Mulcahy, Pierre Nabat, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Fabien Paulot, Michael Schulz, Catherine E. Scott, Roland Séférian, Chris Smith, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilmes, Kostas Tsigaridis, and James Weber
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1105–1126, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1105-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1105-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We find that increased temperatures affect aerosols and reactive gases by changing natural emissions and their rates of removal from the atmosphere. Changing the composition of these species in the atmosphere affects the radiative budget of the climate system and therefore amplifies or dampens the climate response of climate models of the Earth system. This study found that the largest effect is a dampening of climate change as warmer temperatures increase the emissions of cooling aerosols.
Gillian D. Thornhill, William J. Collins, Ryan J. Kramer, Dirk Olivié, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Fiona M. O'Connor, Nathan Luke Abraham, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Susanne E. Bauer, Makoto Deushi, Louisa K. Emmons, Piers M. Forster, Larry W. Horowitz, Ben Johnson, James Keeble, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Martine Michou, Michael J. Mills, Jane P. Mulcahy, Gunnar Myhre, Pierre Nabat, Vaishali Naik, Naga Oshima, Michael Schulz, Christopher J. Smith, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilmes, Tongwen Wu, Guang Zeng, and Jie Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 853–874, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-853-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-853-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper is a study of how different constituents in the atmosphere, such as aerosols and gases like methane and ozone, affect the energy balance in the atmosphere. Different climate models were run using the same inputs to allow an easy comparison of the results and to understand where the models differ. We found the effect of aerosols is to reduce warming in the atmosphere, but this effect varies between models. Reactions between gases are also important in affecting climate.
Zebedee R. J. Nicholls, Malte Meinshausen, Jared Lewis, Robert Gieseke, Dietmar Dommenget, Kalyn Dorheim, Chen-Shuo Fan, Jan S. Fuglestvedt, Thomas Gasser, Ulrich Golüke, Philip Goodwin, Corinne Hartin, Austin P. Hope, Elmar Kriegler, Nicholas J. Leach, Davide Marchegiani, Laura A. McBride, Yann Quilcaille, Joeri Rogelj, Ross J. Salawitch, Bjørn H. Samset, Marit Sandstad, Alexey N. Shiklomanov, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Christopher J. Smith, Steve Smith, Katsumasa Tanaka, Junichi Tsutsui, and Zhiang Xie
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5175–5190, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5175-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5175-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Computational limits mean that we cannot run our most comprehensive climate models for all applications of interest. In such cases, reduced complexity models (RCMs) are used. Here, researchers working on 15 different models present the first systematic community effort to evaluate and compare RCMs: the Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project (RCMIP). Our research ensures that users of RCMs can more easily evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and limitations of their tools.
Christopher J. Smith, Ryan J. Kramer, and Adriana Sima
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2157–2168, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2157-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2157-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Radiative kernels allow efficient diagnosis of climate feedbacks and radiative adjustments to an external forcing using standard climate model output. We present a radiative kernel derived from the UK Met Office's HadGEM3-GA7.1 climate model. We show that a highly resolved stratosphere is important for correctly diagnosing the stratospheric temperature adjustment to greenhouse gas forcings and, by extension, the instantaneous radiative forcing.
Christopher J. Smith, Ryan J. Kramer, Gunnar Myhre, Kari Alterskjær, William Collins, Adriana Sima, Olivier Boucher, Jean-Louis Dufresne, Pierre Nabat, Martine Michou, Seiji Yukimoto, Jason Cole, David Paynter, Hideo Shiogama, Fiona M. O'Connor, Eddy Robertson, Andy Wiltshire, Timothy Andrews, Cécile Hannay, Ron Miller, Larissa Nazarenko, Alf Kirkevåg, Dirk Olivié, Stephanie Fiedler, Anna Lewinschal, Chloe Mackallah, Martin Dix, Robert Pincus, and Piers M. Forster
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9591–9618, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9591-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9591-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The spread in effective radiative forcing for both CO2 and aerosols is narrower in the latest CMIP6 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) generation than in CMIP5. For the case of CO2 it is likely that model radiation parameterisations have improved. Tropospheric and stratospheric radiative adjustments to the forcing behave differently for different forcing agents, and there is still significant diversity in how clouds respond to forcings, particularly for total anthropogenic forcing.
Nicolas Bellouin, Will Davies, Keith P. Shine, Johannes Quaas, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Piers M. Forster, Chris Smith, Lindsay Lee, Leighton Regayre, Guy Brasseur, Natalia Sudarchikova, Idir Bouarar, Olivier Boucher, and Gunnar Myhre
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 1649–1677, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1649-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1649-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Quantifying the imbalance in the Earth's energy budget caused by human activities is important to understand and predict climate changes. This study presents new estimates of the imbalance caused by changes in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, ozone, and particles of pollution. Over the period 2003–2017, the overall imbalance has been positive, indicating that the climate system has gained energy and will warm further.
Nicholas James Leach, Zebedee Nicholls, Stuart Jenkins, Christopher J. Smith, John Lynch, Michelle Cain, Bill Wu, Junichi Tsutsui, and Myles R. Allen
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-379, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-379, 2020
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
GIR is a simple climate model designed to make exploration of the impact of greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions on the climate easy and understandable for its users. It uses an intuitive input and output structure, and the model is itself a set of only six equations. This lends the model to applications such as teaching, or as a lowest common denominator model between groups in large-scale climate assessments. It could also be used to investigate more complex models through emulation.
Tamás Kovács, Wuhu Feng, Anna Totterdill, John M. C. Plane, Sandip Dhomse, Juan Carlos Gómez-Martín, Gabriele P. Stiller, Florian J. Haenel, Christopher Smith, Piers M. Forster, Rolando R. García, Daniel R. Marsh, and Martyn P. Chipperfield
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 883–898, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-883-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-883-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is a very potent greenhouse gas, which is present in the atmosphere only through its industrial use, for example as an electrical insulator. To estimate accurately the impact of SF6 emissions on climate we need to know how long it persists in the atmosphere before being removed. Previous estimates of the SF6 lifetime indicate a large degree of uncertainty. Here we use a detailed atmospheric model to calculate a current best estimate of the SF6 lifetime.
Camilla Mathison, Eleanor J. Burke, Gregory Munday, Chris D. Jones, Chris J. Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Andy J. Wiltshire, Chris Huntingford, Eszter Kovacs, Laila K. Gohar, Rebecca M. Varney, and Douglas McNeall
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1785–1808, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present PRIME (Probabilistic Regional Impacts from Model patterns and Emissions), which is designed to take new emissions scenarios and rapidly provide regional impact information. PRIME allows large ensembles to be run on multi-centennial timescales, including the analysis of many important variables for impact assessments. Our evaluation shows that PRIME reproduces the climate response for known scenarios, providing confidence in using PRIME for novel scenarios.
Xinyue Shao, Minghuai Wang, Xinyi Dong, Yaman Liu, Stephen R. Arnold, Leighton A. Regayre, Duseong S. Jo, Wenxiang Shen, Hao Wang, Man Yue, Jingyi Wang, Wenxin Zhang, and Ken S. Carslaw
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4135, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4135, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses a global chemistry-climate model to investigate how new particle formation (NPF) from highly oxygenated organic molecules (HOMs) contributes to cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) in both preindustrial (PI) and present-day (PD) environments, and its impact on aerosol indirect radiative forcing. The findings highlight the crucial role of biogenic emissions in climate change, providing new insights for carbon-neutral scenarios and enhancing understanding of aerosol-cloud interactions.
Detlef van Vuuren, Brian O'Neill, Claudia Tebaldi, Louise Chini, Pierre Friedlingstein, Tomoko Hasegawa, Keywan Riahi, Benjamin Sanderson, Bala Govindasamy, Nico Bauer, Veronika Eyring, Cheikh Fall, Katja Frieler, Matthew Gidden, Laila Gohar, Andrew Jones, Andrew King, Reto Knutti, Elmar Kriegler, Peter Lawrence, Chris Lennard, Jason Lowe, Camila Mathison, Shahbaz Mehmood, Luciana Prado, Qiang Zhang, Steven Rose, Alexander Ruane, Carl-Friederich Schleussner, Roland Seferian, Jana Sillmann, Chris Smith, Anna Sörensson, Swapna Panickal, Kaoru Tachiiri, Naomi Vaughan, Saritha Vishwanathan, Tokuta Yokohata, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a set of six plausible 21st century emission scenarios, and their multi-century extensions, that will be used by the international community of climate modeling centers to produce the next generation of climate projections. These projections will support climate, impact and mitigation researchers, provide information to practitioners to address future risks from climate change, and contribute to policymakers’ considerations of the trade-offs among various levels of mitigation.
Weiyu Zhang, Kwinten Van Weverberg, Cyril J. Morcrette, Wuhu Feng, Kalli Furtado, Paul R. Field, Chih-Chieh Chen, Andrew Gettelman, Piers M. Forster, Daniel R. Marsh, and Alexandru Rap
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 473–489, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-473-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-473-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Contrail cirrus is the largest, but also most uncertain, contribution of aviation to global warming. We evaluate, for the first time, the impact of the host climate model on contrail cirrus properties. Substantial differences exist between contrail cirrus formation, persistence, and radiative effects in the host climate models. Reliable contrail cirrus simulations require advanced representation of cloud optical properties and microphysics, which should be better constrained by observations.
Hazel Mooney, Stephen Arnold, Benjamin Silver, Piers Forster, and Catherine Scott
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3895, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3895, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We simulate the potential changes in natural emissions of volatile gases from the land surface in the UK following afforestation from present-day woodland cover of 13 % to 19 % by 2050. We estimate present-day annual UK emissions of isoprene at 40 kt yr-1 and total monoterpenes at 46 kt yr-1, but emissions from afforested experiments show between a 4 % decrease and 131 % increase in emissions, explained by the variation in emissions activity between and within needleleaf and broadleaf trees.
Yona Silvy, Thomas L. Frölicher, Jens Terhaar, Fortunat Joos, Friedrich A. Burger, Fabrice Lacroix, Myles Allen, Raffaele Bernardello, Laurent Bopp, Victor Brovkin, Jonathan R. Buzan, Patricia Cadule, Martin Dix, John Dunne, Pierre Friedlingstein, Goran Georgievski, Tomohiro Hajima, Stuart Jenkins, Michio Kawamiya, Nancy Y. Kiang, Vladimir Lapin, Donghyun Lee, Paul Lerner, Nadine Mengis, Estela A. Monteiro, David Paynter, Glen P. Peters, Anastasia Romanou, Jörg Schwinger, Sarah Sparrow, Eric Stofferahn, Jerry Tjiputra, Etienne Tourigny, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1591–1628, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1591-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1591-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The adaptive emission reduction approach is applied with Earth system models to generate temperature stabilization simulations. These simulations provide compatible emission pathways and budgets for a given warming level, uncovering uncertainty ranges previously missing in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project scenarios. These target-based emission-driven simulations offer a more coherent assessment across models for studying both the carbon cycle and its impacts under climate stabilization.
Magali Verkerk, Thomas J. Aubry, Christopher Smith, Peter O. Hopcroft, Michael Sigl, Jessica E. Tierney, Kevin Anchukaitis, Matthew Osman, Anja Schmidt, and Matthew Toohey
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3635, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3635, 2024
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Climate of the Past (CP).
Short summary
Short summary
Large volcanic eruptions can trigger global cooling, affecting human societies. Using ice-core records and simple climate model to simulate volcanic effect over the last 8500 years, we show that volcanic eruptions cool climate by 0.12 °C on average. By comparing model results with temperature recorded by tree rings over the last 1000 years, we demonstrate that our models can predict the large-scale cooling caused by volcanic eruptions, and can be used in case of large eruption in the future.
Chris Smith, Donald P. Cummins, Hege-Beate Fredriksen, Zebedee Nicholls, Malte Meinshausen, Myles Allen, Stuart Jenkins, Nicholas Leach, Camilla Mathison, and Antti-Ilari Partanen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8569–8592, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate projections are only useful if the underlying models that produce them are well calibrated and can reproduce observed climate change. We formalise a software package that calibrates the open-source FaIR simple climate model to full-complexity Earth system models. Observations, including historical warming, and assessments of key climate variables such as that of climate sensitivity are used to constrain the model output.
Benjamin M. Sanderson, Ben B. B. Booth, John Dunne, Veronika Eyring, Rosie A. Fisher, Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew J. Gidden, Tomohiro Hajima, Chris D. Jones, Colin G. Jones, Andrew King, Charles D. Koven, David M. Lawrence, Jason Lowe, Nadine Mengis, Glen P. Peters, Joeri Rogelj, Chris Smith, Abigail C. Snyder, Isla R. Simpson, Abigail L. S. Swann, Claudia Tebaldi, Tatiana Ilyina, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Roland Séférian, Bjørn H. Samset, Detlef van Vuuren, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8141–8172, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We discuss how, in order to provide more relevant guidance for climate policy, coordinated climate experiments should adopt a greater focus on simulations where Earth system models are provided with carbon emissions from fossil fuels together with land use change instructions, rather than past approaches that have largely focused on experiments with prescribed atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. We discuss how these goals might be achieved in coordinated climate modeling experiments.
Benjamin Mark Sanderson, Victor Brovkin, Rosie Fisher, David Hohn, Tatiana Ilyina, Chris Jones, Torben Koenigk, Charles Koven, Hongmei Li, David Lawrence, Peter Lawrence, Spencer Liddicoat, Andrew Macdougall, Nadine Mengis, Zebedee Nicholls, Eleanor O'Rourke, Anastasia Romanou, Marit Sandstad, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Seferian, Lori Sentman, Isla Simpson, Chris Smith, Norman Steinert, Abigail Swann, Jerry Tjiputra, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3356, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3356, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates how climate models warm in response to simplified carbon emissions trajectories, refining understanding of climate reversibility and commitment. Metrics are defined for warming response to cumulative emissions and for the cessation or ramp-down to net-zero and net-negative levels. Results indicate that previous concentration-driven experiments may have overstated zero emissions commitment due to emissions rates exceeding historical levels.
Xinyue Shao, Minghuai Wang, Xinyi Dong, Yaman Liu, Wenxiang Shen, Stephen R. Arnold, Leighton A. Regayre, Meinrat O. Andreae, Mira L. Pöhlker, Duseong S. Jo, Man Yue, and Ken S. Carslaw
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 11365–11389, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11365-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11365-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Highly oxygenated organic molecules (HOMs) play an important role in atmospheric new particle formation (NPF). By semi-explicitly coupling the chemical mechanism of HOMs and a comprehensive nucleation scheme in a global climate model, the updated model shows better agreement with measurements of nucleation rate, growth rate, and NPF event frequency. Our results reveal that HOM-driven NPF leads to a considerable increase in particle and cloud condensation nuclei burden globally.
Robert J. Allen, Xueying Zhao, Cynthia A. Randles, Ryan J. Kramer, Bjørn H. Samset, and Christopher J. Smith
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 11207–11226, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11207-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-11207-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Present-day methane shortwave absorption mutes 28% (7–55%) of the surface warming associated with its longwave absorption. The precipitation increase associated with the longwave radiative effects of the present-day methane perturbation is also muted by shortwave absorption but not significantly so. Methane shortwave absorption also impacts the magnitude of its climate feedback parameter, largely through the cloud feedback.
Paul T. Griffiths, Laura J. Wilcox, Robert J. Allen, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Michael J. Prather, Alexander T. Archibald, Florence Brown, Makoto Deushi, William Collins, Stephanie Fiedler, Naga Oshima, Lee T. Murray, Christopher J. Smith, Steven T. Turnock, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Paul J. Young
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2528, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2528, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The Aerosol Chemistry Model Intercomparison Project (AerChemMIP) aimed to quantify the climate and air quality impacts of aerosols and chemically reactive gases. In this paper, we review its contribution to AR6, and the wider understanding of the role of these species in climate and climate change. We identify remaining challenges concluding with recommendations aimed to improve the utility and uptake of climate model data to address the role of short-lived climate forcers in the Earth system.
Malte Meinshausen, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Kathleen Beyer, Greg Bodeker, Olivier Boucher, Josep G. Canadell, John S. Daniel, Aïda Diongue-Niang, Fatima Driouech, Erich Fischer, Piers Forster, Michael Grose, Gerrit Hansen, Zeke Hausfather, Tatiana Ilyina, Jarmo S. Kikstra, Joyce Kimutai, Andrew D. King, June-Yi Lee, Chris Lennard, Tabea Lissner, Alexander Nauels, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Gian-Kasper Plattner, Hans Pörtner, Joeri Rogelj, Maisa Rojas, Joyashree Roy, Bjørn H. Samset, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Sonia Seneviratne, Christopher J. Smith, Sophie Szopa, Adelle Thomas, Diana Urge-Vorsatz, Guus J. M. Velders, Tokuta Yokohata, Tilo Ziehn, and Zebedee Nicholls
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4533–4559, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4533-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4533-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The scientific community is considering new scenarios to succeed RCPs and SSPs for the next generation of Earth system model runs to project future climate change. To contribute to that effort, we reflect on relevant policy and scientific research questions and suggest categories for representative emission pathways. These categories are tailored to the Paris Agreement long-term temperature goal, high-risk outcomes in the absence of further climate policy and worlds “that could have been”.
Piers M. Forster, Chris Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Bradley Hall, Mathias Hauser, Aurélien Ribes, Debbie Rosen, Nathan P. Gillett, Matthew D. Palmer, Joeri Rogelj, Karina von Schuckmann, Blair Trewin, Myles Allen, Robbie Andrew, Richard A. Betts, Alex Borger, Tim Boyer, Jiddu A. Broersma, Carlo Buontempo, Samantha Burgess, Chiara Cagnazzo, Lijing Cheng, Pierre Friedlingstein, Andrew Gettelman, Johannes Gütschow, Masayoshi Ishii, Stuart Jenkins, Xin Lan, Colin Morice, Jens Mühle, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel E. Killick, Paul B. Krummel, Jan C. Minx, Gunnar Myhre, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Sophie Szopa, Peter Thorne, Mahesh V. M. Kovilakam, Elisa Majamäki, Jukka-Pekka Jalkanen, Margreet van Marle, Rachel M. Hoesly, Robert Rohde, Dominik Schumacher, Guido van der Werf, Russell Vose, Kirsten Zickfeld, Xuebin Zhang, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2625–2658, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2625-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2625-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper tracks some key indicators of global warming through time, from 1850 through to the end of 2023. It is designed to give an authoritative estimate of global warming to date and its causes. We find that in 2023, global warming reached 1.3 °C and is increasing at over 0.2 °C per decade. This is caused by all-time-high greenhouse gas emissions.
Bjorn Stevens, Stefan Adami, Tariq Ali, Hartwig Anzt, Zafer Aslan, Sabine Attinger, Jaana Bäck, Johanna Baehr, Peter Bauer, Natacha Bernier, Bob Bishop, Hendryk Bockelmann, Sandrine Bony, Guy Brasseur, David N. Bresch, Sean Breyer, Gilbert Brunet, Pier Luigi Buttigieg, Junji Cao, Christelle Castet, Yafang Cheng, Ayantika Dey Choudhury, Deborah Coen, Susanne Crewell, Atish Dabholkar, Qing Dai, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Dale Durran, Ayoub El Gaidi, Charlie Ewen, Eleftheria Exarchou, Veronika Eyring, Florencia Falkinhoff, David Farrell, Piers M. Forster, Ariane Frassoni, Claudia Frauen, Oliver Fuhrer, Shahzad Gani, Edwin Gerber, Debra Goldfarb, Jens Grieger, Nicolas Gruber, Wilco Hazeleger, Rolf Herken, Chris Hewitt, Torsten Hoefler, Huang-Hsiung Hsu, Daniela Jacob, Alexandra Jahn, Christian Jakob, Thomas Jung, Christopher Kadow, In-Sik Kang, Sarah Kang, Karthik Kashinath, Katharina Kleinen-von Königslöw, Daniel Klocke, Uta Kloenne, Milan Klöwer, Chihiro Kodama, Stefan Kollet, Tobias Kölling, Jenni Kontkanen, Steve Kopp, Michal Koran, Markku Kulmala, Hanna Lappalainen, Fakhria Latifi, Bryan Lawrence, June Yi Lee, Quentin Lejeun, Christian Lessig, Chao Li, Thomas Lippert, Jürg Luterbacher, Pekka Manninen, Jochem Marotzke, Satoshi Matsouoka, Charlotte Merchant, Peter Messmer, Gero Michel, Kristel Michielsen, Tomoki Miyakawa, Jens Müller, Ramsha Munir, Sandeep Narayanasetti, Ousmane Ndiaye, Carlos Nobre, Achim Oberg, Riko Oki, Tuba Özkan-Haller, Tim Palmer, Stan Posey, Andreas Prein, Odessa Primus, Mike Pritchard, Julie Pullen, Dian Putrasahan, Johannes Quaas, Krishnan Raghavan, Venkatachalam Ramaswamy, Markus Rapp, Florian Rauser, Markus Reichstein, Aromar Revi, Sonakshi Saluja, Masaki Satoh, Vera Schemann, Sebastian Schemm, Christina Schnadt Poberaj, Thomas Schulthess, Cath Senior, Jagadish Shukla, Manmeet Singh, Julia Slingo, Adam Sobel, Silvina Solman, Jenna Spitzer, Philip Stier, Thomas Stocker, Sarah Strock, Hang Su, Petteri Taalas, John Taylor, Susann Tegtmeier, Georg Teutsch, Adrian Tompkins, Uwe Ulbrich, Pier-Luigi Vidale, Chien-Ming Wu, Hao Xu, Najibullah Zaki, Laure Zanna, Tianjun Zhou, and Florian Ziemen
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2113–2122, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To manage Earth in the Anthropocene, new tools, new institutions, and new forms of international cooperation will be required. Earth Virtualization Engines is proposed as an international federation of centers of excellence to empower all people to respond to the immense and urgent challenges posed by climate change.
Stephanie Fiedler, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Christopher J. Smith, Paul Griffiths, Ryan J. Kramer, Toshihiko Takemura, Robert J. Allen, Ulas Im, Matthew Kasoar, Angshuman Modak, Steven Turnock, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Duncan Watson-Parris, Daniel M. Westervelt, Laura J. Wilcox, Alcide Zhao, William J. Collins, Michael Schulz, Gunnar Myhre, and Piers M. Forster
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2387–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate scientists want to better understand modern climate change. Thus, climate model experiments are performed and compared. The results of climate model experiments differ, as assessed in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report. This article gives insights into the challenges and outlines opportunities for further improving the understanding of climate change. It is based on views of a group of experts in atmospheric composition–climate interactions.
Robert E. Kopp, Gregory G. Garner, Tim H. J. Hermans, Shantenu Jha, Praveen Kumar, Alexander Reedy, Aimée B. A. Slangen, Matteo Turilli, Tamsin L. Edwards, Jonathan M. Gregory, George Koubbe, Anders Levermann, Andre Merzky, Sophie Nowicki, Matthew D. Palmer, and Chris Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7461–7489, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7461-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7461-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Future sea-level rise projections exhibit multiple forms of uncertainty, all of which must be considered by scientific assessments intended to inform decision-making. The Framework for Assessing Changes To Sea-level (FACTS) is a new software package intended to support assessments of global mean, regional, and extreme sea-level rise. An early version of FACTS supported the development of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report sea-level projections.
Hamza Ahsan, Hailong Wang, Jingbo Wu, Mingxuan Wu, Steven J. Smith, Susanne Bauer, Harrison Suchyta, Dirk Olivié, Gunnar Myhre, Hitoshi Matsui, Huisheng Bian, Jean-François Lamarque, Ken Carslaw, Larry Horowitz, Leighton Regayre, Mian Chin, Michael Schulz, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Toshihiko Takemura, and Vaishali Naik
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14779–14799, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14779-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14779-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We examine the impact of the assumed effective height of SO2 injection, SO2 and BC emission seasonality, and the assumed fraction of SO2 emissions injected as SO4 on climate and chemistry model results. We find that the SO2 injection height has a large impact on surface SO2 concentrations and, in some models, radiative flux. These assumptions are a
hiddensource of inter-model variability and may be leading to bias in some climate model results.
Olivia Linke, Johannes Quaas, Finja Baumer, Sebastian Becker, Jan Chylik, Sandro Dahlke, André Ehrlich, Dörthe Handorf, Christoph Jacobi, Heike Kalesse-Los, Luca Lelli, Sina Mehrdad, Roel A. J. Neggers, Johannes Riebold, Pablo Saavedra Garfias, Niklas Schnierstein, Matthew D. Shupe, Chris Smith, Gunnar Spreen, Baptiste Verneuil, Kameswara S. Vinjamuri, Marco Vountas, and Manfred Wendisch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 9963–9992, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9963-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-9963-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Lapse rate feedback (LRF) is a major driver of the Arctic amplification (AA) of climate change. It arises because the warming is stronger at the surface than aloft. Several processes can affect the LRF in the Arctic, such as the omnipresent temperature inversion. Here, we compare multimodel climate simulations to Arctic-based observations from a large research consortium to broaden our understanding of these processes, find synergy among them, and constrain the Arctic LRF and AA.
Christopher D. Wells, Lawrence S. Jackson, Amanda C. Maycock, and Piers M. Forster
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 817–834, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-817-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-817-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
There are many possibilities for future emissions, with different impacts in different places. Complex models can study these impacts but take a long time to run, even on powerful computers. Simple methods can be used to reduce this time by estimating the complex model output, but these are not perfect. This study looks at the accuracy of one of these techniques, showing that there are limitations to its use, especially for low-emission future scenarios.
Mark D. Zelinka, Christopher J. Smith, Yi Qin, and Karl E. Taylor
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8879–8898, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The primary uncertainty in how strongly Earth's climate has been perturbed by human activities comes from the unknown radiative impact of aerosol changes. Accurately quantifying these forcings – and their sub-components – in climate models is crucial for understanding the past and future simulated climate. In this study we describe biases in previously published estimates of aerosol radiative forcing in climate models and provide corrected estimates along with code for users to compute them.
Leighton A. Regayre, Lucia Deaconu, Daniel P. Grosvenor, David M. H. Sexton, Christopher Symonds, Tom Langton, Duncan Watson-Paris, Jane P. Mulcahy, Kirsty J. Pringle, Mark Richardson, Jill S. Johnson, John W. Rostron, Hamish Gordon, Grenville Lister, Philip Stier, and Ken S. Carslaw
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8749–8768, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8749-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8749-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosol forcing of Earth’s energy balance has persisted as a major cause of uncertainty in climate simulations over generations of climate model development. We show that structural deficiencies in a climate model are exposed by comprehensively exploring parametric uncertainty and that these deficiencies limit how much the model uncertainty can be reduced through observational constraint. This provides a future pathway towards building models with greater physical realism and lower uncertainty.
Piers M. Forster, Christopher J. Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Mathias Hauser, Aurélien Ribes, Debbie Rosen, Nathan Gillett, Matthew D. Palmer, Joeri Rogelj, Karina von Schuckmann, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Blair Trewin, Xuebin Zhang, Myles Allen, Robbie Andrew, Arlene Birt, Alex Borger, Tim Boyer, Jiddu A. Broersma, Lijing Cheng, Frank Dentener, Pierre Friedlingstein, José M. Gutiérrez, Johannes Gütschow, Bradley Hall, Masayoshi Ishii, Stuart Jenkins, Xin Lan, June-Yi Lee, Colin Morice, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel Killick, Jan C. Minx, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Sophie Szopa, Peter Thorne, Robert Rohde, Maisa Rojas Corradi, Dominik Schumacher, Russell Vose, Kirsten Zickfeld, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 2295–2327, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2295-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2295-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This is a critical decade for climate action, but there is no annual tracking of the level of human-induced warming. We build on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment reports that are authoritative but published infrequently to create a set of key global climate indicators that can be tracked through time. Our hope is that this becomes an important annual publication that policymakers, media, scientists and the public can refer to.
Jarmo S. Kikstra, Zebedee R. J. Nicholls, Christopher J. Smith, Jared Lewis, Robin D. Lamboll, Edward Byers, Marit Sandstad, Malte Meinshausen, Matthew J. Gidden, Joeri Rogelj, Elmar Kriegler, Glen P. Peters, Jan S. Fuglestvedt, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Bjørn H. Samset, Laura Wienpahl, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Kaj-Ivar van der Wijst, Alaa Al Khourdajie, Piers M. Forster, Andy Reisinger, Roberto Schaeffer, and Keywan Riahi
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 9075–9109, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9075-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9075-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing hundreds or thousands of emission scenarios in terms of their global mean temperature implications requires standardised procedures of infilling, harmonisation, and probabilistic temperature assessments. We here present the open-source
climate-assessmentworkflow that was used in the IPCC AR6 Working Group III report. The paper provides key insight for anyone wishing to understand the assessment of climate outcomes of mitigation pathways in the context of the Paris Agreement.
Leighton A. Regayre, Lucia Deaconu, Daniel P. Grosvenor, David Sexton, Christopher C. Symonds, Tom Langton, Duncan Watson-Paris, Jane P. Mulcahy, Kirsty J. Pringle, Mark Richardson, Jill S. Johnson, John Rostron, Hamish Gordon, Grenville Lister, Philip Stier, and Ken S. Carslaw
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1330, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1330, 2022
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
We show that potential structural deficiencies in a climate model can be exposed by comprehensively exploring its parametric uncertainty, and that these deficiencies limit how much the model uncertainty can be reduced through observational constraint. Combined consideration of parametric and structural uncertainties provides a future pathway towards building models that have greater physical realism and lower uncertainty.
Ruksana H. Rimi, Karsten Haustein, Emily J. Barbour, Sarah N. Sparrow, Sihan Li, David C. H. Wallom, and Myles R. Allen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5737–5756, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5737-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5737-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Extreme rainfall events are major concerns in Bangladesh. Heavy downpours can cause flash floods and damage nearly harvestable crops in pre-monsoon season. While in monsoon season, the impacts can range from widespread agricultural loss, huge property damage, to loss of lives and livelihoods. This paper assesses the role of anthropogenic climate change drivers in changing risks of extreme rainfall events during pre-monsoon and monsoon seasons at local sub-regional-scale within Bangladesh.
Johannes Quaas, Hailing Jia, Chris Smith, Anna Lea Albright, Wenche Aas, Nicolas Bellouin, Olivier Boucher, Marie Doutriaux-Boucher, Piers M. Forster, Daniel Grosvenor, Stuart Jenkins, Zbigniew Klimont, Norman G. Loeb, Xiaoyan Ma, Vaishali Naik, Fabien Paulot, Philip Stier, Martin Wild, Gunnar Myhre, and Michael Schulz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12221–12239, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12221-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12221-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Pollution particles cool climate and offset part of the global warming. However, they are washed out by rain and thus their effect responds quickly to changes in emissions. We show multiple datasets to demonstrate that aerosol emissions and their concentrations declined in many regions influenced by human emissions, as did the effects on clouds. Consequently, the cooling impact on the Earth energy budget became smaller. This change in trend implies a relative warming.
Amy H. Peace, Ben B. B. Booth, Leighton A. Regayre, Ken S. Carslaw, David M. H. Sexton, Céline J. W. Bonfils, and John W. Rostron
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1215–1232, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1215-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1215-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Anthropogenic aerosol emissions have been linked to driving climate responses such as shifts in the location of tropical rainfall. However, the interaction of aerosols with climate remains one of the most uncertain aspects of climate modelling and limits our ability to predict future climate change. We use an ensemble of climate model simulations to investigate what impact the large uncertainty in how aerosols interact with climate has on predicting future tropical rainfall shifts.
Jan C. Minx, William F. Lamb, Robbie M. Andrew, Josep G. Canadell, Monica Crippa, Niklas Döbbeling, Piers M. Forster, Diego Guizzardi, Jos Olivier, Glen P. Peters, Julia Pongratz, Andy Reisinger, Matthew Rigby, Marielle Saunois, Steven J. Smith, Efisio Solazzo, and Hanqin Tian
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 5213–5252, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-5213-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-5213-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We provide a synthetic dataset on anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for 1970–2018 with a fast-track extension to 2019. We show that GHG emissions continued to rise across all gases and sectors. Annual average GHG emissions growth slowed, but absolute decadal increases have never been higher in human history. We identify a number of data gaps and data quality issues in global inventories and highlight their importance for monitoring progress towards international climate goals.
Robin D. Lamboll, Chris D. Jones, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Stephanie Fiedler, Bjørn H. Samset, Nathan P. Gillett, Joeri Rogelj, and Piers M. Forster
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3683–3695, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3683-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3683-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Lockdowns to avoid the spread of COVID-19 have created an unprecedented reduction in human emissions. We can estimate the changes in emissions at a country level, but to make predictions about how this will affect our climate, we need more precise information about where the emissions happen. Here we combine older estimates of where emissions normally occur with very recent estimates of sector activity levels to enable different groups to make simulations of the climatic effects of lockdown.
Nicholas J. Leach, Stuart Jenkins, Zebedee Nicholls, Christopher J. Smith, John Lynch, Michelle Cain, Tristram Walsh, Bill Wu, Junichi Tsutsui, and Myles R. Allen
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3007–3036, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3007-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3007-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents an update of the FaIR simple climate model, which can estimate the impact of anthropogenic greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions on the global climate. This update aims to significantly increase the structural simplicity of the model, making it more understandable and transparent. This simplicity allows it to be implemented in a wide range of environments, including Excel. We suggest that it could be used widely in academia, corporate research, and education.
Geert Jan van Oldenborgh, Folmer Krikken, Sophie Lewis, Nicholas J. Leach, Flavio Lehner, Kate R. Saunders, Michiel van Weele, Karsten Haustein, Sihan Li, David Wallom, Sarah Sparrow, Julie Arrighi, Roop K. Singh, Maarten K. van Aalst, Sjoukje Y. Philip, Robert Vautard, and Friederike E. L. Otto
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 941–960, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-941-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-941-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Southeastern Australia suffered from disastrous bushfires during the 2019/20 fire season, raising the question whether these have become more likely due to climate change. We found no attributable trend in extreme annual or monthly low precipitation but a clear shift towards more extreme heat. However, this shift is underestimated by the models. Analysing fire weather directly, we found that the chance has increased by at least 30 %, but due to the underestimation it could well be higher.
Gillian Thornhill, William Collins, Dirk Olivié, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Alex Archibald, Susanne Bauer, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Stephanie Fiedler, Gerd Folberth, Ada Gjermundsen, Larry Horowitz, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Martine Michou, Jane Mulcahy, Pierre Nabat, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Fabien Paulot, Michael Schulz, Catherine E. Scott, Roland Séférian, Chris Smith, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilmes, Kostas Tsigaridis, and James Weber
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1105–1126, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1105-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1105-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We find that increased temperatures affect aerosols and reactive gases by changing natural emissions and their rates of removal from the atmosphere. Changing the composition of these species in the atmosphere affects the radiative budget of the climate system and therefore amplifies or dampens the climate response of climate models of the Earth system. This study found that the largest effect is a dampening of climate change as warmer temperatures increase the emissions of cooling aerosols.
Gillian D. Thornhill, William J. Collins, Ryan J. Kramer, Dirk Olivié, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Fiona M. O'Connor, Nathan Luke Abraham, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Susanne E. Bauer, Makoto Deushi, Louisa K. Emmons, Piers M. Forster, Larry W. Horowitz, Ben Johnson, James Keeble, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Martine Michou, Michael J. Mills, Jane P. Mulcahy, Gunnar Myhre, Pierre Nabat, Vaishali Naik, Naga Oshima, Michael Schulz, Christopher J. Smith, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilmes, Tongwen Wu, Guang Zeng, and Jie Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 853–874, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-853-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-853-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper is a study of how different constituents in the atmosphere, such as aerosols and gases like methane and ozone, affect the energy balance in the atmosphere. Different climate models were run using the same inputs to allow an easy comparison of the results and to understand where the models differ. We found the effect of aerosols is to reduce warming in the atmosphere, but this effect varies between models. Reactions between gases are also important in affecting climate.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Judith Hauck, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Corinne Le Quéré, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone Alin, Luiz E. O. C. Aragão, Almut Arneth, Vivek Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Alice Benoit-Cattin, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Selma Bultan, Naveen Chandra, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Wiley Evans, Liesbeth Florentie, Piers M. Forster, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Ian Harris, Kerstin Hartung, Vanessa Haverd, Richard A. Houghton, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Emilie Joetzjer, Koji Kadono, Etsushi Kato, Vassilis Kitidis, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Andrew Lenton, Sebastian Lienert, Zhu Liu, Danica Lombardozzi, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Metzl, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin O'Brien, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Ingunn Skjelvan, Adam J. P. Smith, Adrienne J. Sutton, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Guido van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Anthony P. Walker, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3269–3340, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3269-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2020 describes the data sets and methodology used to quantify the emissions of carbon dioxide and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land, and ocean. These living data are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Zebedee R. J. Nicholls, Malte Meinshausen, Jared Lewis, Robert Gieseke, Dietmar Dommenget, Kalyn Dorheim, Chen-Shuo Fan, Jan S. Fuglestvedt, Thomas Gasser, Ulrich Golüke, Philip Goodwin, Corinne Hartin, Austin P. Hope, Elmar Kriegler, Nicholas J. Leach, Davide Marchegiani, Laura A. McBride, Yann Quilcaille, Joeri Rogelj, Ross J. Salawitch, Bjørn H. Samset, Marit Sandstad, Alexey N. Shiklomanov, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Christopher J. Smith, Steve Smith, Katsumasa Tanaka, Junichi Tsutsui, and Zhiang Xie
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5175–5190, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5175-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5175-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Computational limits mean that we cannot run our most comprehensive climate models for all applications of interest. In such cases, reduced complexity models (RCMs) are used. Here, researchers working on 15 different models present the first systematic community effort to evaluate and compare RCMs: the Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project (RCMIP). Our research ensures that users of RCMs can more easily evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and limitations of their tools.
Matthew J. Rowlinson, Alexandru Rap, Douglas S. Hamilton, Richard J. Pope, Stijn Hantson, Steve R. Arnold, Jed O. Kaplan, Almut Arneth, Martyn P. Chipperfield, Piers M. Forster, and Lars Nieradzik
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10937–10951, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10937-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10937-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Tropospheric ozone is an important greenhouse gas which contributes to anthropogenic climate change; however, the effect of human emissions is uncertain because pre-industrial ozone concentrations are not well understood. We use revised inventories of pre-industrial natural emissions to estimate the human contribution to changes in tropospheric ozone. We find that tropospheric ozone radiative forcing is up to 34 % lower when using improved pre-industrial biomass burning and vegetation emissions.
Christopher J. Smith, Ryan J. Kramer, and Adriana Sima
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2157–2168, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2157-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2157-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Radiative kernels allow efficient diagnosis of climate feedbacks and radiative adjustments to an external forcing using standard climate model output. We present a radiative kernel derived from the UK Met Office's HadGEM3-GA7.1 climate model. We show that a highly resolved stratosphere is important for correctly diagnosing the stratospheric temperature adjustment to greenhouse gas forcings and, by extension, the instantaneous radiative forcing.
Leighton A. Regayre, Julia Schmale, Jill S. Johnson, Christian Tatzelt, Andrea Baccarini, Silvia Henning, Masaru Yoshioka, Frank Stratmann, Martin Gysel-Beer, Daniel P. Grosvenor, and Ken S. Carslaw
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 10063–10072, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10063-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-10063-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The amount of energy reflected back into space because of man-made particles is highly uncertain. Processes related to naturally occurring particles cause most of the uncertainty, but these processes are poorly constrained by present-day measurements. We show that measurements over the Southern Ocean, far from pollution sources, efficiently reduce climate model uncertainties. Our results pave the way to designing experiments and measurement campaigns that reduce this uncertainty even further.
Christopher J. Smith, Ryan J. Kramer, Gunnar Myhre, Kari Alterskjær, William Collins, Adriana Sima, Olivier Boucher, Jean-Louis Dufresne, Pierre Nabat, Martine Michou, Seiji Yukimoto, Jason Cole, David Paynter, Hideo Shiogama, Fiona M. O'Connor, Eddy Robertson, Andy Wiltshire, Timothy Andrews, Cécile Hannay, Ron Miller, Larissa Nazarenko, Alf Kirkevåg, Dirk Olivié, Stephanie Fiedler, Anna Lewinschal, Chloe Mackallah, Martin Dix, Robert Pincus, and Piers M. Forster
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9591–9618, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9591-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9591-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The spread in effective radiative forcing for both CO2 and aerosols is narrower in the latest CMIP6 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) generation than in CMIP5. For the case of CO2 it is likely that model radiation parameterisations have improved. Tropospheric and stratospheric radiative adjustments to the forcing behave differently for different forcing agents, and there is still significant diversity in how clouds respond to forcings, particularly for total anthropogenic forcing.
Jill S. Johnson, Leighton A. Regayre, Masaru Yoshioka, Kirsty J. Pringle, Steven T. Turnock, Jo Browse, David M. H. Sexton, John W. Rostron, Nick A. J. Schutgens, Daniel G. Partridge, Dantong Liu, James D. Allan, Hugh Coe, Aijun Ding, David D. Cohen, Armand Atanacio, Ville Vakkari, Eija Asmi, and Ken S. Carslaw
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9491–9524, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9491-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9491-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We use over 9000 monthly aggregated grid-box measurements of aerosol to constrain the uncertainty in the HadGEM3-UKCA climate model. Measurements of AOD, PM2.5, particle number concentrations, sulfate and organic mass concentrations are compared to 1 million
variantsof the model using an implausibility metric. Despite many compensating effects in the model, the procedure constrains the probability distributions of many parameters, and direct radiative forcing uncertainty is reduced by 34 %.
Nicolas Bellouin, Will Davies, Keith P. Shine, Johannes Quaas, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Piers M. Forster, Chris Smith, Lindsay Lee, Leighton Regayre, Guy Brasseur, Natalia Sudarchikova, Idir Bouarar, Olivier Boucher, and Gunnar Myhre
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 1649–1677, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1649-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-1649-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Quantifying the imbalance in the Earth's energy budget caused by human activities is important to understand and predict climate changes. This study presents new estimates of the imbalance caused by changes in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, ozone, and particles of pollution. Over the period 2003–2017, the overall imbalance has been positive, indicating that the climate system has gained energy and will warm further.
Nicholas James Leach, Zebedee Nicholls, Stuart Jenkins, Christopher J. Smith, John Lynch, Michelle Cain, Bill Wu, Junichi Tsutsui, and Myles R. Allen
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-379, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-379, 2020
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
GIR is a simple climate model designed to make exploration of the impact of greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions on the climate easy and understandable for its users. It uses an intuitive input and output structure, and the model is itself a set of only six equations. This lends the model to applications such as teaching, or as a lowest common denominator model between groups in large-scale climate assessments. It could also be used to investigate more complex models through emulation.
Øivind Hodnebrog, Gunnar Myhre, Bjørn H. Samset, Kari Alterskjær, Timothy Andrews, Olivier Boucher, Gregory Faluvegi, Dagmar Fläschner, Piers M. Forster, Matthew Kasoar, Alf Kirkevåg, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Dirk Olivié, Thomas B. Richardson, Dilshad Shawki, Drew Shindell, Keith P. Shine, Philip Stier, Toshihiko Takemura, Apostolos Voulgarakis, and Duncan Watson-Parris
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 12887–12899, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12887-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12887-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Different greenhouse gases (e.g. CO2) and aerosols (e.g. black carbon) impact the Earth’s water cycle differently. Here we investigate how various gases and particles impact atmospheric water vapour and its lifetime, i.e., the average number of days that water vapour stays in the atmosphere after evaporation and before precipitation. We find that this lifetime could increase substantially by the end of this century, indicating that important changes in precipitation patterns are excepted.
Matthew J. Rowlinson, Alexandru Rap, Stephen R. Arnold, Richard J. Pope, Martyn P. Chipperfield, Joe McNorton, Piers Forster, Hamish Gordon, Kirsty J. Pringle, Wuhu Feng, Brian J. Kerridge, Barry L. Latter, and Richard Siddans
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 8669–8686, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-8669-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-8669-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Wildfires and meteorology have a substantial effect on atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases such as methane and ozone. During the 1997 El Niño event, unusually large fire emissions indirectly increased global methane through carbon monoxide emission, which decreased the oxidation capacity of the atmosphere. There were also large regional changes to tropospheric ozone concentrations, but contrasting effects of fire and meteorology resulted in a small change to global radiative forcing.
Sam Illingworth, Alice Bell, Stuart Capstick, Adam Corner, Piers Forster, Rosie Leigh, Maria Loroño Leturiondo, Catherine Muller, Harriett Richardson, and Emily Shuckburgh
Geosci. Commun., 1, 9–24, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-1-9-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-1-9-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Climate change is real, it is happening now, and it will not be stopped by the sole efforts of scientists. This study shows how poetry and open conversation can be used to develop a dialogue around mitigating climate change with different communities, including faith groups and people living with disabilities. Furthermore, it shows how this dialogue can help us to better understand the opportunities that these communities present in tackling the negative effects of human-made climate change.
Jill S. Johnson, Leighton A. Regayre, Masaru Yoshioka, Kirsty J. Pringle, Lindsay A. Lee, David M. H. Sexton, John W. Rostron, Ben B. B. Booth, and Kenneth S. Carslaw
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 13031–13053, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-13031-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-13031-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We estimate the uncertainty in an aerosol–climate model that has been tuned to match several common types of observations. We used a large set of model simulations and built emulators so that we could generate 4 million “variants” of our climate model. Even after using nine aerosol and cloud observations to constrain the model, the uncertainty remains large. We conclude that estimates of aerosol forcing from multi-model studies are likely to be more uncertain than currently estimated.
Leighton A. Regayre, Jill S. Johnson, Masaru Yoshioka, Kirsty J. Pringle, David M. H. Sexton, Ben B. B. Booth, Lindsay A. Lee, Nicolas Bellouin, and Kenneth S. Carslaw
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 9975–10006, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-9975-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-9975-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We sample uncertainty in one climate model by perturbing aerosol and physical atmosphere parameters. Our uncertainty is comparable to multi-model studies. Atmospheric parameters cause most of the top-of-atmosphere flux uncertainty; uncertainty in aerosol forcing is mostly caused by aerosols: both are important. The strongest aerosol forcings are inconsistent with top-of-atmosphere flux observations. Better constraint requires observations that share causes of uncertainty with aerosol forcing.
Tao Tang, Drew Shindell, Bjørn H. Samset, Oliviér Boucher, Piers M. Forster, Øivind Hodnebrog, Gunnar Myhre, Jana Sillmann, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Timothy Andrews, Gregory Faluvegi, Dagmar Fläschner, Trond Iversen, Matthew Kasoar, Viatcheslav Kharin, Alf Kirkevåg, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Dirk Olivié, Thomas Richardson, Camilla W. Stjern, and Toshihiko Takemura
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 8439–8452, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-8439-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-8439-2018, 2018
Benoit P. Guillod, Richard G. Jones, Simon J. Dadson, Gemma Coxon, Gianbattista Bussi, James Freer, Alison L. Kay, Neil R. Massey, Sarah N. Sparrow, David C. H. Wallom, Myles R. Allen, and Jim W. Hall
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 611–634, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-611-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-611-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing the potential impacts of extreme events such as drought and flood requires large datasets of such events, especially when looking at the most severe and rare events. Using a state-of-the-art climate modelling infrastructure that is simulating large numbers of weather time series on volunteers' computers, we generate such a large dataset for the United Kingdom. The dataset covers the recent past (1900–2006) as well as two future time periods (2030s and 2080s).
Richard J. Millar, Zebedee R. Nicholls, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Myles R. Allen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7213–7228, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7213-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7213-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Simple representations of the global coupled climate–carbon-cycle system are required for climate policy analysis. Existing models have often failed to capture important physical dependencies of the climate response to carbon dioxide emissions. In this paper we propose a simple but novel modification to impulse-response climate–carbon-cycle models to capture these physical dependencies. This simple model creates an important tool for both climate policy and climate science analysis.
Benoit P. Guillod, Richard G. Jones, Andy Bowery, Karsten Haustein, Neil R. Massey, Daniel M. Mitchell, Friederike E. L. Otto, Sarah N. Sparrow, Peter Uhe, David C. H. Wallom, Simon Wilson, and Myles R. Allen
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1849–1872, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1849-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1849-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
The weather@home climate modelling system uses the computing power of volunteers around the world to generate a very large number of climate model simulations. This is particularly useful when investigating extreme weather events, notably for the attribution of these events to anthropogenic climate change. A new version of weather@home is presented and evaluated, which includes an improved representation of the land surface and increased horizontal resolution over Europe.
Gunnar Myhre, Wenche Aas, Ribu Cherian, William Collins, Greg Faluvegi, Mark Flanner, Piers Forster, Øivind Hodnebrog, Zbigniew Klimont, Marianne T. Lund, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Cathrine Lund Myhre, Dirk Olivié, Michael Prather, Johannes Quaas, Bjørn H. Samset, Jordan L. Schnell, Michael Schulz, Drew Shindell, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Toshihiko Takemura, and Svetlana Tsyro
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 2709–2720, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-2709-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-2709-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Over the past decades, the geographical distribution of emissions of substances that alter the atmospheric energy balance has changed due to economic growth and pollution regulations. Here, we show the resulting changes to aerosol and ozone abundances and their radiative forcing using recently updated emission data for the period 1990–2015, as simulated by seven global atmospheric composition models. The global mean radiative forcing is more strongly positive than reported in IPCC AR5.
Daniel Mitchell, Krishna AchutaRao, Myles Allen, Ingo Bethke, Urs Beyerle, Andrew Ciavarella, Piers M. Forster, Jan Fuglestvedt, Nathan Gillett, Karsten Haustein, William Ingram, Trond Iversen, Viatcheslav Kharin, Nicholas Klingaman, Neil Massey, Erich Fischer, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, John Scinocca, Øyvind Seland, Hideo Shiogama, Emily Shuckburgh, Sarah Sparrow, Dáithí Stone, Peter Uhe, David Wallom, Michael Wehner, and Rashyd Zaaboul
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 571–583, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-571-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-571-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This paper provides an experimental design to assess impacts of a world that is 1.5 °C warmer than at pre-industrial levels. The design is a new way to approach impacts from the climate community, and aims to answer questions related to the recent Paris Agreement. In particular the paper provides a method for studying extreme events under relatively high mitigation scenarios.
Tamás Kovács, Wuhu Feng, Anna Totterdill, John M. C. Plane, Sandip Dhomse, Juan Carlos Gómez-Martín, Gabriele P. Stiller, Florian J. Haenel, Christopher Smith, Piers M. Forster, Rolando R. García, Daniel R. Marsh, and Martyn P. Chipperfield
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 883–898, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-883-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-883-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is a very potent greenhouse gas, which is present in the atmosphere only through its industrial use, for example as an electrical insulator. To estimate accurately the impact of SF6 emissions on climate we need to know how long it persists in the atmosphere before being removed. Previous estimates of the SF6 lifetime indicate a large degree of uncertainty. Here we use a detailed atmospheric model to calculate a current best estimate of the SF6 lifetime.
Robert Pincus, Piers M. Forster, and Bjorn Stevens
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3447–3460, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3447-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3447-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes an experimental protocol to understand the changes in energy balance (the "radiative forcing") that arise due to changes in atmospheric composition and why this value is not the same across climate models. The protocol includes a way to determine the total forcing to which each model is subjected, experiments designed at teasing out why certain errors occur, and experiments to identify any robust signals caused by atmospheric particles from human activities.
Mitchell T. Black, David J. Karoly, Suzanne M. Rosier, Sam M. Dean, Andrew D. King, Neil R. Massey, Sarah N. Sparrow, Andy Bowery, David Wallom, Richard G. Jones, Friederike E. L. Otto, and Myles R. Allen
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3161–3176, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3161-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3161-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents a citizen science computing project, known as weather@home Australia–New Zealand, which runs climate models on thousands of home computers. By harnessing the power of volunteers' computers, this project is capable of simulating extreme weather events over Australia and New Zealand under different climate scenarios.
Anna Totterdill, Tamás Kovács, Wuhu Feng, Sandip Dhomse, Christopher J. Smith, Juan Carlos Gómez-Martín, Martyn P. Chipperfield, Piers M. Forster, and John M. C. Plane
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 11451–11463, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-11451-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-11451-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we have experimentally determined the infrared absorption cross sections of NF3 and CFC-115, calculated the radiative forcing and efficiency using two radiative transfer models and identified the effect of clouds and stratospheric adjustment. We have also determined their atmospheric lifetimes using the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model.
S. Sippel, F. E. L. Otto, M. Forkel, M. R. Allen, B. P. Guillod, M. Heimann, M. Reichstein, S. I. Seneviratne, K. Thonicke, and M. D. Mahecha
Earth Syst. Dynam., 7, 71–88, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-71-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-71-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce a novel technique to bias correct climate model output for impact simulations that preserves its physical consistency and multivariate structure. The methodology considerably improves the representation of extremes in climatic variables relative to conventional bias correction strategies. Illustrative simulations of biosphere–atmosphere carbon and water fluxes with a biosphere model (LPJmL) show that the novel technique can be usefully applied to drive climate impact models.
Related subject area
Climate and Earth system modeling
Presentation, calibration and testing of the DCESS II Earth system model of intermediate complexity (version 1.0)
Synthesizing global carbon–nitrogen coupling effects – the MAGICC coupled carbon–nitrogen cycle model v1.0
Historical trends and controlling factors of isoprene emissions in CMIP6 Earth system models
Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data
From weather data to river runoff: using spatiotemporal convolutional networks for discharge forecasting
A Fortran–Python interface for integrating machine learning parameterization into earth system models
A rapid-application emissions-to-impacts tool for scenario assessment: Probabilistic Regional Impacts from Model patterns and Emissions (PRIME)
The DOE E3SM version 2.1: overview and assessment of the impacts of parameterized ocean submesoscales
WRF-ELM v1.0: a regional climate model to study land–atmosphere interactions over heterogeneous land use regions
Modeling commercial-scale CO2 storage in the gas hydrate stability zone with PFLOTRAN v6.0
DiuSST: a conceptual model of diurnal warm layers for idealized atmospheric simulations with interactive sea surface temperature
High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project phase 2 (HighResMIP2) towards CMIP7
T&C-CROP: representing mechanistic crop growth with a terrestrial biosphere model (T&C, v1.5) – model formulation and validation
An updated non-intrusive, multi-scale, and flexible coupling interface in WRF 4.6.0
Monitoring and benchmarking Earth system model simulations with ESMValTool v2.12.0
The Earth Science Box Modeling Toolkit (ESBMTK 0.14.0.11): a Python library for research and teaching
CropSuite v1.0 – a comprehensive open-source crop suitability model considering climate variability for climate impact assessment
ICON ComIn – the ICON Community Interface (ComIn version 0.1.0, with ICON version 2024.01-01)
Using feature importance as an exploratory data analysis tool on Earth system models
A new metrics framework for quantifying and intercomparing atmospheric rivers in observations, reanalyses, and climate models
The real challenges for climate and weather modelling on its way to sustained exascale performance: a case study using ICON (v2.6.6)
Improving the representation of major Indian crops in the Community Land Model version 5.0 (CLM5) using site-scale crop data
Evaluation of CORDEX ERA5-forced NARCliM2.0 regional climate models over Australia using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model version 4.1.2
Design, evaluation, and future projections of the NARCliM2.0 CORDEX-CMIP6 Australasia regional climate ensemble
Amending the algorithm of aerosol–radiation interactions in WRF-Chem (v4.4)
The very-high-resolution configuration of the EC-Earth global model for HighResMIP
GOSI9: UK Global Ocean and Sea Ice configurations
Decomposition of skill scores for conditional verification: impact of Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation phases on the predictability of decadal temperature forecasts
Virtual Integration of Satellite and In-situ Observation Networks (VISION) v1.0: In-Situ Observations Simulator (ISO_simulator)
Climate model downscaling in central Asia: a dynamical and a neural network approach
Advanced climate model evaluation with ESMValTool v2.11.0 using parallel, out-of-core, and distributed computing
Multi-year simulations at kilometre scale with the Integrated Forecasting System coupled to FESOM2.5 and NEMOv3.4
Subsurface hydrological controls on the short-term effects of hurricanes on nitrate–nitrogen runoff loading: a case study of Hurricane Ida using the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) Land Model (v2.1)
CARIB12: a regional Community Earth System Model/Modular Ocean Model 6 configuration of the Caribbean Sea
Process-based modeling framework for sustainable irrigation management at the regional scale: Integrating rice production, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions
Architectural insights into and training methodology optimization of Pangu-Weather
Evaluation of global fire simulations in CMIP6 Earth system models
Evaluating downscaled products with expected hydroclimatic co-variances
Software sustainability of global impact models
fair-calibrate v1.4.1: calibration, constraining, and validation of the FaIR simple climate model for reliable future climate projections
ISOM 1.0: a fully mesoscale-resolving idealized Southern Ocean model and the diversity of multiscale eddy interactions
A computationally lightweight model for ensemble forecasting of environmental hazards: General TAMSAT-ALERT v1.2.1
Introducing the MESMER-M-TPv0.1.0 module: spatially explicit Earth system model emulation for monthly precipitation and temperature
The need for carbon-emissions-driven climate projections in CMIP7
Robust handling of extremes in quantile mapping – “Murder your darlings”
A protocol for model intercomparison of impacts of marine cloud brightening climate intervention
An extensible perturbed parameter ensemble for the Community Atmosphere Model version 6
Coupling the regional climate model ICON-CLM v2.6.6 to the Earth system model GCOAST-AHOI v2.0 using OASIS3-MCT v4.0
A fully coupled solid-particle microphysics scheme for stratospheric aerosol injections within the aerosol–chemistry–climate model SOCOL-AERv2
The Tropical Basin Interaction Model Intercomparison Project (TBIMIP)
Esteban Fernández Villanueva and Gary Shaffer
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2161–2192, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2161-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2161-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We describe, calibrate and test the Danish Center for Earth System Science (DCESS) II model, a new, broad, adaptable and fast Earth system model. DCESS II is designed for global simulations over timescales of years to millions of years using limited computer resources like a personal computer. With its flexibility and comprehensive treatment of the global carbon cycle, DCESS II is a useful, computationally friendly tool for simulations of past climates as well as for future Earth system projections.
Gang Tang, Zebedee Nicholls, Alexander Norton, Sönke Zaehle, and Malte Meinshausen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2193–2230, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2193-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2193-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We studied carbon–nitrogen coupling in Earth system models by developing a global carbon–nitrogen cycle model (CNit v1.0) within the widely used emulator MAGICC. CNit effectively reproduced the global carbon–nitrogen cycle dynamics observed in complex models. Our results show persistent nitrogen limitations on plant growth (net primary production) from 1850 to 2100, suggesting that nitrogen deficiency may constrain future land carbon sequestration.
Ngoc Thi Nhu Do, Kengo Sudo, Akihiko Ito, Louisa K. Emmons, Vaishali Naik, Kostas Tsigaridis, Øyvind Seland, Gerd A. Folberth, and Douglas I. Kelley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2079–2109, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2079-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2079-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding historical isoprene emission changes is important for predicting future climate, but trends and their controlling factors remain uncertain. This study shows that long-term isoprene trends vary among Earth system models mainly due to partially incorporating CO2 effects and land cover changes rather than to climate. Future models that refine these factors’ effects on isoprene emissions, along with long-term observations, are essential for better understanding plant–climate interactions.
Gang Tang, Zebedee Nicholls, Chris Jones, Thomas Gasser, Alexander Norton, Tilo Ziehn, Alejandro Romero-Prieto, and Malte Meinshausen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2111–2136, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2111-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2111-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We analyzed carbon and nitrogen mass conservation in data from various Earth system models. Our findings reveal significant discrepancies between flux and pool size data, where cumulative imbalances can reach hundreds of gigatons of carbon or nitrogen. These imbalances appear primarily due to missing or inconsistently reported fluxes – especially for land-use and fire emissions. To enhance data quality, we recommend that future climate data protocols address this issue at the reporting stage.
Florian Börgel, Sven Karsten, Karoline Rummel, and Ulf Gräwe
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2005–2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2005-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2005-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasting river runoff, which is crucial for managing water resources and understanding climate impacts, can be challenging. This study introduces a new method using convolutional long short-term memory (ConvLSTM) networks, a machine learning model that processes spatial and temporal data. Focusing on the Baltic Sea region, our model uses weather data as input to predict daily river runoff for 97 rivers.
Tao Zhang, Cyril Morcrette, Meng Zhang, Wuyin Lin, Shaocheng Xie, Ye Liu, Kwinten Van Weverberg, and Joana Rodrigues
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1917–1928, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1917-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1917-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models (ESMs) struggle with the uncertainties associated with parameterizing subgrid physics. Machine learning (ML) algorithms offer a solution by learning the important relationships and features from high-resolution models. To incorporate ML parameterizations into ESMs, we develop a Fortran–Python interface that allows for calling Python functions within Fortran-based ESMs. Through two case studies, this interface demonstrates its feasibility, modularity, and effectiveness.
Camilla Mathison, Eleanor J. Burke, Gregory Munday, Chris D. Jones, Chris J. Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Andy J. Wiltshire, Chris Huntingford, Eszter Kovacs, Laila K. Gohar, Rebecca M. Varney, and Douglas McNeall
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1785–1808, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present PRIME (Probabilistic Regional Impacts from Model patterns and Emissions), which is designed to take new emissions scenarios and rapidly provide regional impact information. PRIME allows large ensembles to be run on multi-centennial timescales, including the analysis of many important variables for impact assessments. Our evaluation shows that PRIME reproduces the climate response for known scenarios, providing confidence in using PRIME for novel scenarios.
Katherine M. Smith, Alice M. Barthel, LeAnn M. Conlon, Luke P. Van Roekel, Anthony Bartoletti, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Chengzhu Zhang, Carolyn Branecky Begeman, James J. Benedict, Gautam Bisht, Yan Feng, Walter Hannah, Bryce E. Harrop, Nicole Jeffery, Wuyin Lin, Po-Lun Ma, Mathew E. Maltrud, Mark R. Petersen, Balwinder Singh, Qi Tang, Teklu Tesfa, Jonathan D. Wolfe, Shaocheng Xie, Xue Zheng, Karthik Balaguru, Oluwayemi Garuba, Peter Gleckler, Aixue Hu, Jiwoo Lee, Ben Moore-Maley, and Ana C. Ordoñez
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1613–1633, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1613-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1613-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Version 2.1 of the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) adds the Fox-Kemper et al. (2011) mixed-layer eddy parameterization, which restratifies the ocean surface layer through an overturning streamfunction. Results include surface layer bias reduction in temperature, salinity, and sea ice extent in the North Atlantic; a small strengthening of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation; and improvements to many atmospheric climatological variables.
Huilin Huang, Yun Qian, Gautam Bisht, Jiali Wang, Tirthankar Chakraborty, Dalei Hao, Jianfeng Li, Travis Thurber, Balwinder Singh, Zhao Yang, Ye Liu, Pengfei Xue, William J. Sacks, Ethan Coon, and Robert Hetland
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1427–1443, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1427-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1427-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We integrate the E3SM Land Model (ELM) with the WRF model through the Lightweight Infrastructure for Land Atmosphere Coupling (LILAC) Earth System Modeling Framework (ESMF). This framework includes a top-level driver, LILAC, for variable communication between WRF and ELM and ESMF caps for ELM initialization, execution, and finalization. The LILAC–ESMF framework maintains the integrity of the ELM's source code structure and facilitates the transfer of future ELM model developments to WRF-ELM.
Michael Nole, Jonah Bartrand, Fawz Naim, and Glenn Hammond
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1413–1425, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1413-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1413-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Safe carbon dioxide (CO2) storage is likely to be critical for mitigating some of the most severe effects of climate change. We present a simulation framework for modeling CO2 storage beneath the seafloor, where CO2 can form a solid. This can aid in permanent CO2 storage for long periods of time. Our models show what a commercial-scale CO2 injection would look like in a marine environment. We discuss what would need to be considered when designing a subsea CO2 injection.
Reyk Börner, Jan O. Haerter, and Romain Fiévet
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1333–1356, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1333-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1333-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The daily cycle of sea surface temperature (SST) impacts clouds above the ocean and could influence the clustering of thunderstorms linked to extreme rainfall and hurricanes. However, daily SST variability is often poorly represented in modeling studies of how clouds cluster. We present a simple, wind-responsive model of upper-ocean temperature for use in atmospheric simulations. Evaluating the model against observations, we show that it performs significantly better than common slab models.
Malcolm J. Roberts, Kevin A. Reed, Qing Bao, Joseph J. Barsugli, Suzana J. Camargo, Louis-Philippe Caron, Ping Chang, Cheng-Ta Chen, Hannah M. Christensen, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Ivy Frenger, Neven S. Fučkar, Shabeh ul Hasson, Helene T. Hewitt, Huanping Huang, Daehyun Kim, Chihiro Kodama, Michael Lai, Lai-Yung Ruby Leung, Ryo Mizuta, Paulo Nobre, Pablo Ortega, Dominique Paquin, Christopher D. Roberts, Enrico Scoccimarro, Jon Seddon, Anne Marie Treguier, Chia-Ying Tu, Paul A. Ullrich, Pier Luigi Vidale, Michael F. Wehner, Colin M. Zarzycki, Bosong Zhang, Wei Zhang, and Ming Zhao
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1307–1332, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1307-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1307-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
HighResMIP2 is a model intercomparison project focusing on high-resolution global climate models, that is, those with grid spacings of 25 km or less in the atmosphere and ocean, using simulations of decades to a century in length. We are proposing an update of our simulation protocol to make the models more applicable to key questions for climate variability and hazard in present-day and future projections and to build links with other communities to provide more robust climate information.
Jordi Buckley Paules, Simone Fatichi, Bonnie Warring, and Athanasios Paschalis
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1287–1305, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1287-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1287-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present and validate enhancements to the process-based T&C model aimed at improving its representation of crop growth and management practices. The updated model, T&C-CROP, enables applications such as analysing the hydrological and carbon storage impacts of land use transitions (e.g. conversions between crops, forests, and pastures) and optimizing irrigation and fertilization strategies in response to climate change.
Sébastien Masson, Swen Jullien, Eric Maisonnave, David Gill, Guillaume Samson, Mathieu Le Corre, and Lionel Renault
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1241–1263, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1241-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1241-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This article details a new feature we implemented in the popular regional atmospheric model WRF. This feature allows for data exchange between WRF and any other model (e.g. an ocean model) using the coupling library Ocean–Atmosphere–Sea–Ice–Soil Model Coupling Toolkit (OASIS3-MCT). This coupling interface is designed to be non-intrusive, flexible and modular. It also offers the possibility of taking into account the nested zooms used in WRF or in the models with which it is coupled.
Axel Lauer, Lisa Bock, Birgit Hassler, Patrick Jöckel, Lukas Ruhe, and Manuel Schlund
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1169–1188, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1169-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1169-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models are important tools to improve our understanding of current climate and to project climate change. Thus, it is crucial to understand possible shortcomings in the models. New features of the ESMValTool software package allow one to compare and visualize a model's performance with respect to reproducing observations in the context of other climate models in an easy and user-friendly way. We aim to help model developers assess and monitor climate simulations more efficiently.
Ulrich G. Wortmann, Tina Tsan, Mahrukh Niazi, Irene A. Ma, Ruben Navasardyan, Magnus-Roland Marun, Bernardo S. Chede, Jingwen Zhong, and Morgan Wolfe
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1155–1167, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1155-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1155-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth Science Box Modeling Toolkit (ESBMTK) is a user-friendly Python library that simplifies the creation of models to study earth system processes, such as the carbon cycle and ocean chemistry. It enhances learning by emphasizing concepts over programming and is accessible to students and researchers alike. By automating complex calculations and promoting code clarity, ESBMTK accelerates model development while improving reproducibility and the usability of scientific research.
Florian Zabel, Matthias Knüttel, and Benjamin Poschlod
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1067–1087, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1067-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1067-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
CropSuite is a new open-source crop suitability model. It provides a GUI and a wide range of options, including a spatial downscaling of climate data. We apply CropSuite to 48 staple and opportunity crops at a 1 km spatial resolution in Africa. We find that climate variability significantly impacts suitable areas but also affects optimal sowing dates and multiple cropping potential. The results provide valuable information for climate impact assessments, adaptation, and land-use planning.
Kerstin Hartung, Bastian Kern, Nils-Arne Dreier, Jörn Geisbüsch, Mahnoosh Haghighatnasab, Patrick Jöckel, Astrid Kerkweg, Wilton Jaciel Loch, Florian Prill, and Daniel Rieger
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1001–1015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1001-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1001-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The ICOsahedral Non-hydrostatic (ICON) model system Community Interface (ComIn) library supports connecting third-party modules to the ICON model. Third-party modules can range from simple diagnostic Python scripts to full chemistry models. ComIn offers a low barrier for code extensions to ICON, provides multi-language support (Fortran, C/C++, and Python), and reduces the migration effort in response to new ICON releases. This paper presents the ComIn design principles and a range of use cases.
Daniel Ries, Katherine Goode, Kellie McClernon, and Benjamin Hillman
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1041–1065, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1041-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1041-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Machine learning has advanced research in the climate science domain, but its models are difficult to understand. In order to understand the impacts and consequences of climate interventions such as stratospheric aerosol injection, complex models are often necessary. We use a case study to illustrate how we can understand the inner workings of a complex model. We present this technique as an exploratory tool that can be used to quickly discover and assess relationships in complex climate data.
Bo Dong, Paul Ullrich, Jiwoo Lee, Peter Gleckler, Kristin Chang, and Travis A. O'Brien
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 961–976, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-961-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-961-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
A metrics package designed for easy analysis of atmospheric river (AR) characteristics and statistics is presented. The tool is efficient for diagnosing systematic AR bias in climate models and useful for evaluating new AR characteristics in model simulations. In climate models, landfalling AR precipitation shows dry biases globally, and AR tracks are farther poleward (equatorward) in the North and South Atlantic (South Pacific and Indian Ocean).
Panagiotis Adamidis, Erik Pfister, Hendryk Bockelmann, Dominik Zobel, Jens-Olaf Beismann, and Marek Jacob
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 905–919, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-905-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-905-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we investigated performance indicators of the climate model ICON (ICOsahedral Nonhydrostatic) on different compute architectures to answer the question of how to generate high-resolution climate simulations. Evidently, it is not enough to use more computing units of the conventionally used architectures; higher memory throughput is the most promising approach. More potential can be gained from single-node optimization rather than simply increasing the number of compute nodes.
Kangari Narender Reddy, Somnath Baidya Roy, Sam S. Rabin, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Gudimetla Venkateswara Varma, Ruchira Biswas, and Devavat Chiru Naik
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 763–785, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-763-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-763-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The study aimed to improve the representation of wheat and rice in a land model for the Indian region. The modified model performed significantly better than the default model in simulating crop phenology, yield, and carbon, water, and energy fluxes compared to observations. The study highlights the need for global land models to use region-specific crop parameters for accurately simulating vegetation processes and land surface processes.
Giovanni Di Virgilio, Fei Ji, Eugene Tam, Jason P. Evans, Jatin Kala, Julia Andrys, Christopher Thomas, Dipayan Choudhury, Carlos Rocha, Yue Li, and Matthew L. Riley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 703–724, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-703-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-703-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluate the skill in simulating the Australian climate of some of the latest generation of regional climate models. We show when and where the models simulate this climate with high skill versus model limitations. We show how new models perform relative to the previous-generation models, assessing how model design features may underlie key performance improvements. This work is of national and international relevance as it can help guide the use and interpretation of climate projections.
Giovanni Di Virgilio, Jason P. Evans, Fei Ji, Eugene Tam, Jatin Kala, Julia Andrys, Christopher Thomas, Dipayan Choudhury, Carlos Rocha, Stephen White, Yue Li, Moutassem El Rafei, Rishav Goyal, Matthew L. Riley, and Jyothi Lingala
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 671–702, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-671-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-671-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce new climate models that simulate Australia’s future climate at regional scales, including at an unprecedented resolution of 4 km for 1950–2100. We describe the model design process used to create these new climate models. We show how the new models perform relative to previous-generation models and compare their climate projections. This work is of national and international relevance as it can help guide climate model design and the use and interpretation of climate projections.
Jiawang Feng, Chun Zhao, Qiuyan Du, Zining Yang, and Chen Jin
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 585–603, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-585-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-585-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we improved the calculation of how aerosols in the air interact with radiation in WRF-Chem. The original model used a simplified method, but we developed a more accurate approach. We found that this method significantly changes the properties of the estimated aerosols and their effects on radiation, especially for dust aerosols. It also impacts the simulated weather conditions. Our work highlights the importance of correctly representing aerosol–radiation interactions in models.
Eduardo Moreno-Chamarro, Thomas Arsouze, Mario Acosta, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Miguel Castrillo, Eric Ferrer, Amanda Frigola, Daria Kuznetsova, Eneko Martin-Martinez, Pablo Ortega, and Sergi Palomas
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 461–482, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-461-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-461-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present the high-resolution model version of the EC-Earth global climate model to contribute to HighResMIP. The combined model resolution is about 10–15 km in both the ocean and atmosphere, which makes it one of the finest ever used to complete historical and scenario simulations. This model is compared with two lower-resolution versions, with a 100 km and a 25 km grid. The three models are compared with observations to study the improvements thanks to the increased resolution.
Catherine Guiavarc'h, David Storkey, Adam T. Blaker, Ed Blockley, Alex Megann, Helene Hewitt, Michael J. Bell, Daley Calvert, Dan Copsey, Bablu Sinha, Sophia Moreton, Pierre Mathiot, and Bo An
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 377–403, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-377-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-377-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Ocean and Sea Ice configuration version 9 (GOSI9) is the new UK hierarchy of model configurations based on the Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean (NEMO) and available at three resolutions. It will be used for various applications, e.g. weather forecasting and climate prediction. It improves upon the previous version by reducing global temperature and salinity biases and enhancing the representation of Arctic sea ice and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.
Andy Richling, Jens Grieger, and Henning W. Rust
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 361–375, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-361-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-361-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The performance of weather and climate prediction systems is variable in time and space. It is of interest how this performance varies in different situations. We provide a decomposition of a skill score (a measure of forecast performance) as a tool for detailed assessment of performance variability to support model development or forecast improvement. The framework is exemplified with decadal forecasts to assess the impact of different ocean states in the North Atlantic on temperature forecast.
Maria R. Russo, Sadie L. Bartholomew, David Hassell, Alex M. Mason, Erica Neininger, A. James Perman, David A. J. Sproson, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Nathan Luke Abraham
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 181–191, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-181-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-181-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Observational data and modelling capabilities have expanded in recent years, but there are still barriers preventing these two data sources from being used in synergy. Proper comparison requires generating, storing, and handling a large amount of data. This work describes the first step in the development of a new set of software tools, the VISION toolkit, which can enable the easy and efficient integration of observational and model data required for model evaluation.
Bijan Fallah, Masoud Rostami, Emmanuele Russo, Paula Harder, Christoph Menz, Peter Hoffmann, Iulii Didovets, and Fred F. Hattermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 161–180, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-161-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-161-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We tried to contribute to a local climate change impact study in central Asia, a region that is water-scarce and vulnerable to global climate change. We use regional models and machine learning to produce reliable local data from global climate models. We find that regional models show more realistic and detailed changes in heavy precipitation than global climate models. Our work can help assess the future risks of extreme events and plan adaptation strategies in central Asia.
Manuel Schlund, Bouwe Andela, Jörg Benke, Ruth Comer, Birgit Hassler, Emma Hogan, Peter Kalverla, Axel Lauer, Bill Little, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, Francesco Nattino, Patrick Peglar, Valeriu Predoi, Stef Smeets, Stephen Worsley, Martin Yeo, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-236, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-236, 2025
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) is a community diagnostics and performance metrics tool for the evaluation of Earth system models. Here, we describe recent significant improvements of ESMValTool’s computational efficiency including parallel, out-of-core, and distributed computing. Evaluations with the enhanced version of ESMValTool are faster, use less computational resources, and can handle input data larger than the available memory.
Thomas Rackow, Xabier Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Tobias Becker, Sebastian Milinski, Irina Sandu, Razvan Aguridan, Peter Bechtold, Sebastian Beyer, Jean Bidlot, Souhail Boussetta, Willem Deconinck, Michail Diamantakis, Peter Dueben, Emanuel Dutra, Richard Forbes, Rohit Ghosh, Helge F. Goessling, Ioan Hadade, Jan Hegewald, Thomas Jung, Sarah Keeley, Lukas Kluft, Nikolay Koldunov, Aleksei Koldunov, Tobias Kölling, Josh Kousal, Christian Kühnlein, Pedro Maciel, Kristian Mogensen, Tiago Quintino, Inna Polichtchouk, Balthasar Reuter, Domokos Sármány, Patrick Scholz, Dmitry Sidorenko, Jan Streffing, Birgit Sützl, Daisuke Takasuka, Steffen Tietsche, Mirco Valentini, Benoît Vannière, Nils Wedi, Lorenzo Zampieri, and Florian Ziemen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 33–69, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-33-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-33-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Detailed global climate model simulations have been created based on a numerical weather prediction model, offering more accurate spatial detail down to the scale of individual cities ("kilometre-scale") and a better understanding of climate phenomena such as atmospheric storms, whirls in the ocean, and cracks in sea ice. The new model aims to provide globally consistent information on local climate change with greater precision, benefiting environmental planning and local impact modelling.
Yilin Fang, Hoang Viet Tran, and L. Ruby Leung
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 19–32, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-19-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-19-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Hurricanes may worsen water quality in the lower Mississippi River basin (LMRB) by increasing nutrient runoff. We found that runoff parameterizations greatly affect nitrate–nitrogen runoff simulated using an Earth system land model. Our simulations predicted increased nitrogen runoff in the LMRB during Hurricane Ida in 2021, albeit less pronounced than the observations, indicating areas for model improvement to better understand and manage nutrient runoff loss during hurricanes in the region.
Giovanni Seijo-Ellis, Donata Giglio, Gustavo Marques, and Frank Bryan
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8989–9021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8989-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8989-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A CESM–MOM6 regional configuration of the Caribbean Sea was developed in response to the rising need for high-resolution models for climate impact studies. The configuration is validated for the period 2000–2020 and improves significant errors in a low-resolution model. Oceanic properties are well represented. Patterns of freshwater associated with the Amazon River are well captured, and the mean flows of ocean waters across multiple passages in the Caribbean Sea agree with observations.
Yan Bo, Hao Liang, Tao Li, and Feng Zhou
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-212, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-212, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for GMD
Short summary
Short summary
This study proposed an advancing framework for modeling regional rice production, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions. The framework integrated a process-based soil-crop model with key physiological effects, a novel model upscaling method, and the NSGA-II multi-objective optimization algorithm at a parallel computing platform. The framework provides a valuable tool for irrigation optimization to deliver co-benefits of ensuring food production, reducing water use and greenhouse gas emissions.
Deifilia To, Julian Quinting, Gholam Ali Hoshyaripour, Markus Götz, Achim Streit, and Charlotte Debus
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8873–8884, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8873-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8873-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Pangu-Weather is a breakthrough machine learning model in medium-range weather forecasting that considers 3D atmospheric information. We show that using a simpler 2D framework improves robustness, speeds up training, and reduces computational needs by 20 %–30 %. We introduce a training procedure that varies the importance of atmospheric variables over time to speed up training convergence. Decreasing computational demand increases the accessibility of training and working with the model.
Fang Li, Xiang Song, Sandy P. Harrison, Jennifer R. Marlon, Zhongda Lin, L. Ruby Leung, Jörg Schwinger, Virginie Marécal, Shiyu Wang, Daniel S. Ward, Xiao Dong, Hanna Lee, Lars Nieradzik, Sam S. Rabin, and Roland Séférian
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8751–8771, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8751-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8751-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study provides the first comprehensive assessment of historical fire simulations from 19 Earth system models in phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). Most models reproduce global totals, spatial patterns, seasonality, and regional historical changes well but fail to simulate the recent decline in global burned area and underestimate the fire response to climate variability. CMIP6 simulations address three critical issues of phase-5 models.
Seung H. Baek, Paul A. Ullrich, Bo Dong, and Jiwoo Lee
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8665–8681, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8665-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8665-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluate downscaled products by examining locally relevant co-variances during precipitation events. Common statistical downscaling techniques preserve expected co-variances during convective precipitation (a stationary phenomenon). However, they dampen future intensification of frontal precipitation (a non-stationary phenomenon) captured in global climate models and dynamical downscaling. Our study quantifies a ramification of the stationarity assumption underlying statistical downscaling.
Emmanuel Nyenah, Petra Döll, Daniel S. Katz, and Robert Reinecke
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8593–8611, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8593-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8593-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Research software is vital for scientific progress but is often developed by scientists with limited skills, time, and funding, leading to challenges in usability and maintenance. Our study across 10 sectors shows strengths in version control, open-source licensing, and documentation while emphasizing the need for containerization and code quality. We recommend workshops; code quality metrics; funding; and following the findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR) standards.
Chris Smith, Donald P. Cummins, Hege-Beate Fredriksen, Zebedee Nicholls, Malte Meinshausen, Myles Allen, Stuart Jenkins, Nicholas Leach, Camilla Mathison, and Antti-Ilari Partanen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8569–8592, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate projections are only useful if the underlying models that produce them are well calibrated and can reproduce observed climate change. We formalise a software package that calibrates the open-source FaIR simple climate model to full-complexity Earth system models. Observations, including historical warming, and assessments of key climate variables such as that of climate sensitivity are used to constrain the model output.
Jingwei Xie, Xi Wang, Hailong Liu, Pengfei Lin, Jiangfeng Yu, Zipeng Yu, Junlin Wei, and Xiang Han
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8469–8493, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8469-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8469-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We propose the concept of mesoscale ocean direct numerical simulation (MODNS), which should resolve the first baroclinic deformation radius and ensure the numerical dissipative effects do not directly contaminate the mesoscale motions. It can be a benchmark for testing mesoscale ocean large eddy simulation (MOLES) methods in ocean models. We build an idealized Southern Ocean model using MITgcm to generate a type of MODNS. We also illustrate the diversity of multiscale eddy interactions.
Emily Black, John Ellis, and Ross I. Maidment
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8353–8372, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8353-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8353-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present General TAMSAT-ALERT, a computationally lightweight and versatile tool for generating ensemble forecasts from time series data. General TAMSAT-ALERT is capable of combining multiple streams of monitoring and meteorological forecasting data into probabilistic hazard assessments. In this way, it complements existing systems and enhances their utility for actionable hazard assessment.
Sarah Schöngart, Lukas Gudmundsson, Mathias Hauser, Peter Pfleiderer, Quentin Lejeune, Shruti Nath, Sonia Isabelle Seneviratne, and Carl-Friedrich Schleussner
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8283–8320, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8283-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8283-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Precipitation and temperature are two of the most impact-relevant climatic variables. Yet, projecting future precipitation and temperature data under different emission scenarios relies on complex models that are computationally expensive. In this study, we propose a method that allows us to generate monthly means of local precipitation and temperature at low computational costs. Our modelling framework is particularly useful for all downstream applications of climate model data.
Benjamin M. Sanderson, Ben B. B. Booth, John Dunne, Veronika Eyring, Rosie A. Fisher, Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew J. Gidden, Tomohiro Hajima, Chris D. Jones, Colin G. Jones, Andrew King, Charles D. Koven, David M. Lawrence, Jason Lowe, Nadine Mengis, Glen P. Peters, Joeri Rogelj, Chris Smith, Abigail C. Snyder, Isla R. Simpson, Abigail L. S. Swann, Claudia Tebaldi, Tatiana Ilyina, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Roland Séférian, Bjørn H. Samset, Detlef van Vuuren, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8141–8172, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We discuss how, in order to provide more relevant guidance for climate policy, coordinated climate experiments should adopt a greater focus on simulations where Earth system models are provided with carbon emissions from fossil fuels together with land use change instructions, rather than past approaches that have largely focused on experiments with prescribed atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. We discuss how these goals might be achieved in coordinated climate modeling experiments.
Peter Berg, Thomas Bosshard, Denica Bozhinova, Lars Bärring, Joakim Löw, Carolina Nilsson, Gustav Strandberg, Johan Södling, Johan Thuresson, Renate Wilcke, and Wei Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8173–8179, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8173-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8173-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
When bias adjusting climate model data using quantile mapping, one needs to prescribe what to do at the tails of the distribution, where a larger data range is likely encountered outside of the calibration period. The end result is highly dependent on the method used. We show that, to avoid discontinuities in the time series, one needs to exclude data in the calibration range to also activate the extrapolation functionality in that time period.
Philip J. Rasch, Haruki Hirasawa, Mingxuan Wu, Sarah J. Doherty, Robert Wood, Hailong Wang, Andy Jones, James Haywood, and Hansi Singh
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7963–7994, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7963-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7963-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce a protocol to compare computer climate simulations to better understand a proposed strategy intended to counter warming and climate impacts from greenhouse gas increases. This slightly changes clouds in six ocean regions to reflect more sunlight and cool the Earth. Example changes in clouds and climate are shown for three climate models. Cloud changes differ between the models, but precipitation and surface temperature changes are similar when their cooling effects are made similar.
Trude Eidhammer, Andrew Gettelman, Katherine Thayer-Calder, Duncan Watson-Parris, Gregory Elsaesser, Hugh Morrison, Marcus van Lier-Walqui, Ci Song, and Daniel McCoy
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7835–7853, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7835-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7835-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We describe a dataset where 45 parameters related to cloud processes in the Community Earth System Model version 2 (CESM2) Community Atmosphere Model version 6 (CAM6) are perturbed. Three sets of perturbed parameter ensembles (263 members) were created: current climate, preindustrial aerosol loading and future climate with sea surface temperature increased by 4 K.
Ha Thi Minh Ho-Hagemann, Vera Maurer, Stefan Poll, and Irina Fast
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7815–7834, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7815-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7815-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The regional Earth system model GCOAST-AHOI v2.0 that includes the regional climate model ICON-CLM coupled to the ocean model NEMO and the hydrological discharge model HD via the OASIS3-MCT coupler can be a useful tool for conducting long-term regional climate simulations over the EURO-CORDEX domain. The new OASIS3-MCT coupling interface implemented in ICON-CLM makes it more flexible for coupling to an external ocean model and an external hydrological discharge model.
Sandro Vattioni, Rahel Weber, Aryeh Feinberg, Andrea Stenke, John A. Dykema, Beiping Luo, Georgios A. Kelesidis, Christian A. Bruun, Timofei Sukhodolov, Frank N. Keutsch, Thomas Peter, and Gabriel Chiodo
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7767–7793, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7767-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7767-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We quantified impacts and efficiency of stratospheric solar climate intervention via solid particle injection. Microphysical interactions of solid particles with the sulfur cycle were interactively coupled to the heterogeneous chemistry scheme and the radiative transfer code of an aerosol–chemistry–climate model. Compared to injection of SO2 we only find a stronger cooling efficiency for solid particles when normalizing to the aerosol load but not when normalizing to the injection rate.
Ingo Richter, Ping Chang, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Dietmar Dommenget, Guillaume Gastineau, Aixue Hu, Takahito Kataoka, Noel Keenlyside, Fred Kucharski, Yuko Okumura, Wonsun Park, Malte Stuecker, Andrea Taschetto, Chunzai Wang, Stephen Yeager, and Sang-Wook Yeh
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3110, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3110, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The tropical ocean basins influence each other through multiple pathways and mechanisms, here referred to as tropical basin interaction (TBI). Many researchers have examined TBI using comprehensive climate models, but have obtained conflicting results. This may be partly due to differences in experiment protocols, and partly due to systematic model errors. TBIMIP aims to address this problem by designing a set of TBI experiments that will be performed by multiple models.
Cited articles
Albrecht, B. A.: Aerosols, cloud microphysics, and fractional cloudiness,
Science, 245, 1227–1231, 1989. a
Allen, M. R., Frame, D. J., Huntingford, C., Jones, C. D., Lowe, J. A.,
Meinshausen, M., and Meinshausen, N.: Warming caused by cumulative carbon
emissions towards the trillionth tonne, Nature, 458, 1163–1166,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08019, 2009. a
Andrews, T., Betts, R. A., Booth, B. B. B., Jones, C. D., and Jones, G. S.:
Effective radiative forcing from historical land use change, Clim. Dynam.,
48, 3489–3505, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3280-7, 2017. a
Argo: Argo float data and metadata from Global Data Assembly Centre (Argo
GDAC), SEANOE, https://doi.org/10.17882/42182, 2000. a
Armour, K.: Energy budget constraints on climate sensitivity in light of
inconstant climate feedbacks, Nat. Clim. Change, 7, 331–335,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3278, 2017. a, b
Berkeley Earth: Land + Ocean (1850–Recent) Monthly Global Average
Temperature, available at:
http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/auto/Global/Land_and_Ocean_complete.txt,
last access: 17 October 2017. a
Bond, T. C., Doherty, S. J., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Berntsen, T.,
DeAngelo, B. J., Flanner, M. G., Ghan, S., Kärcher, B., Koch, D., Kinne, S.,
Kondo, Y., Quinn, P. K., Sarofim, M. C., Schultz, M. G., Schulz, M.,
Venkataraman, C., Zhang, H., Zhang, S., Bellouin, N., Guttikunda, S. K.,
Hopke, P. K., Jacobson, M. Z., Kaiser, J. W., Klimont, Z., Lohmann, U.,
Schwarz, J. P., Shindell, D., Storelvmo, T., Warren, S. G., and Zender,
C. S.: Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific
assessment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 5380–5552,
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50171, 2013. a
Boucher, O. and Reddy, M.: Climate trade-off between black carbon and carbon
dioxide emissions, Energ. Policy, 36, 193–200,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.08.039, 2008. a
Boucher, O., Friedlingstein, P., Collins, B., and Shine, K. P.: The indirect
global warming potential and global temperature change potential due to
methane oxidation, Environ. Res. Lett., 4, 044007,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/044007, 2009. a, b
Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G., Forster,
P., Kerminen, V.-M., Kondo, Y., Liao, H., Lohmann, U., Rasch, P., Satheesh,
S., Sherwood, S., Stevens, B., and Zhang, X.: Clouds and Aerosols, in:
Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working
Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M.,
Allen, S., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P.,
571–658, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York,
NY, USA, 2013. a, b, c, d
Carslaw, K., Lee, L., Reddington, C., Pringle, K., Rap, A., Forster, P., Mann,
G., Spracklen, D., Woodhouse, M., Regayre, L., and Pierce, J.: Large
contribution of natural aerosols to uncertainty in indirect forcing, Nature,
503, 67–71, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12674, 2013. a
Collins, M., Knutti, R., Arblaster, J., Dufresne, J.-L., Fichefet, T.,
Friedlingstein, P., Gao, X., Gutowski, W., Johns, T., Krinner, G., Shongwe,
M., Tebaldi, C., Weaver, A., and Wehner, M.: Long-term Climate Change:
Projections, Commitments and Irreversibility, in: Climate Change 2013: The
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited
by: Stocker, T., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S., Boschung, J.,
Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P., 1029–1136, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA,
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.024, 2013. a, b, c, d, e
Cowtan, K. and Way, R. G.: Coverage bias in the HadCRUT4 temperature series
and its impact on recent temperature trends, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 140,
1935–1944, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2297, 2014. a, b, c
Daniel, J. S. and Solomon, S.: On the climate forcing of carbon monoxide, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 103, 13249–13260, https://doi.org/10.1029/98JD00822, 1998. a
Daniel, J. S., Solomon, S., Portmann, R. W., and Garcia, R. R.: Stratospheric
ozone destruction: The importance of bromine relative to chlorine, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104, 23871–23880, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900381,
1999. a
Doutriaux-Boucher, M., Webb, M. J., Gregory, J. M., and Boucher, O.: Carbon
dioxide induced stomatal closure increases radiative forcing via a rapid
reduction in low cloud, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36,
l02703, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL036273, 2009. a
Ehlert, D. and Zickfeld, K.: What determines the warming commitment after
cessation of CO2 emissions?, Environ. Res. Lett., 12, 015002,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa564a, 2017. a
Flato, G., Marotzke, J., Abiodun, B., Braconnot, P., Chou, S., Collins, W.,
Cox, P., Driouech, F., Emori, S., Eyring, V., Forest, C., Gleckler, P.,
Guilyardi, E., Jakob, C., Kattsov, V., Reason, C., and Rummukainen, M.:
Evaluation of Climate Models, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science
Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T., Qin, D.,
Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y.,
Bex, V., and Midgley, P., 741–866, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2013. a
Forest, C. E., Stone, P. H., and Sokolov, A. P.: Estimated PDFs of climate
system properties including natural and anthropogenic forcings, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 33, l01705, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023977, 2006. a
Forster, P., Richardson, T., Maycock, A., Smith, C., Samset, B., Myhre, G.,
Andrews, T., Pincus, R., and Schulz, M.: Recommendations for diagnosing
effective radiative forcing from climate models from CMIP6, J. Geophys.
Res., 121, 12460–12475, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025320, 2016. a
Forster, P. M., Andrews, T., Good, P., Gregory, J. M., Jackson, L. S., and
Zelinka, M.: Evaluating adjusted forcing and model spread for historical and
future scenarios in the CMIP5 generation of climate models, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 118, 1139–1150, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50174, 2013. a, b, c
Frame, D. J., Booth, B. B. B., Kettleborough, J. A., Stainforth, D. A.,
Gregory, J. M., Collins, M., and Allen, M. R.: Constraining climate
forecasts: The role of prior assumptions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, l09702,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL022241, 2005. a, b
Friedlingstein, P.: Carbon cycle feedbacks and future climate change, Philos.
T. R. Soc. A., 373, 14 pp., https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0421, 2015. a
Friedlingstein, P., Cox, P., Betts, R., Bopp, L., von Bloh, W., Brovkin, V.,
Cadule, P., Doney, S., Eby, M., Fung, I., Bala, G., John, J., Jones, C.,
Joos, F., Kato, T., Kawamiya, M., Knorr, W., Lindsay, K., Matthews, H. D.,
Raddatz, T., Rayner, P., Reick, C., Roeckner, E., Schnitzler, K.-G., Schnur,
R., Strassmann, K., Weaver, A. J., Yoshikawa, C., and Zeng, N.:
Climate-Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model
Intercomparison, J. Climate, 19, 3337–3353, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3800.1, 2006. a, b
Fung, I. Y., Doney, S. C., Lindsay, K., and John, J.: Evolution of carbon sinks
in a changing climate, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 102, 11201–11206,
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0504949102, 2005. a
Gasser, T., Peters, G., Fuglestvedt, J., Collins, W., Shindell, D., and Ciais,
P.: Accounting for the climate–carbon feedback in emission metrics, Earth
Syst. Dynam., 8, 235–253, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-8-235-2017, 2017. a
Geoffroy, O., Saint-Martin, D., Olivié, D. J. L., Voldoire, A., Bellon, G.,
and Tytéca, S.: Transient Climate Response in a Two-Layer Energy-Balance
Model. Part I: Analytical Solution and Parameter Calibration Using CMIP5
AOGCM Experiments, J. Climate, 26, 1841–1857,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00195.1, 2013. a, b
Ghan, S. J., Smith, S. J., Wang, M., Zhang, K., Pringle, K., Carslaw, K.,
Pierce, J., Bauer, S., and Adams, P.: A simple model of global aerosol
indirect effects, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 6688–6707,
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50567, 2013. a, b
Gillenwater, M.: Forgotten carbon: indirect CO2 in greenhouse gas emission
inventories, Environ. Sci. Policy, 11, 195–203,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2007.09.001, 2008. a, b
Good, P., Gregory, J. M., and Lowe, J. A.: A step-response simple climate model
to reconstruct and interpret AOGCM projections, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, l01703,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045208, 2011. a
Good, P., Gregory, J. M., Lowe, J. A., and Andrews, T.: Abrupt CO2 experiments
as tools for predicting and understanding CMIP5 representative concentration
pathway projections, Clim. Dynam., 40, 1041–1053,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1410-4, 2013. a
Gregory, J. and Webb, M.: Tropospheric adjustment induces a cloud component in
CO2 forcing, J. Climate, 21, 58–71, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI1834.1, 2008. a
Gregory, J. M. and Andrews, T.: Variation in climate sensitivity and feedback
parameters during the historical period, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 3911–3920,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL068406, 2016GL068406, 2016. a, b
Gregory, J. M., Andrews, T., and Good, P.: The inconstancy of the transient
climate response parameter under increasing CO2, Philos. T. R. Soc. A,
373, 22 pp., https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0417, 2015. a
Gregory, J. M., Andrews, T., Good, P., Mauritsen, T., and Forster, P. M.: Small
global-mean cooling due to volcanic radiative forcing, Clim. Dynam., 47,
3979–3991, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3055-1, 2016. a
Hansen, J., Ruedy, R., Sato, M., and Lo, K.: Global surface temperature change,
Rev. Geophys., 48, RG4004, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010RG000345, 2010. a
Haustein, K., Allen, M., Forster, P., Otto, F., Mitchell, D., Matthews, H., and
Frame, D.: A real-time Global Warming Index, Sci. Reports, 7, 15417,
2017. a
Holmes, C. D., Prather, M. J., Søvde, O. A., and Myhre, G.: Future methane,
hydroxyl, and their uncertainties: key climate and emission parameters for
future predictions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 285–302,
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-285-2013, 2013. a
International Energy Agency: IEA Statistics, available at:
http://www.iea.org/statistics/statisticssearch/report/?country=WORLD&product=oil&year=2005, last access: 8 May
2018. a
IPCC: Annex II: Climate System Scenario Tables, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis,
edited by: Prather, M., Flato, G.,
Friedlingstein, P., Jones, C., Lamarque, J.-F., Liao, H., and Rasch, P., Contribution of Working
Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K.,
Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P.
M., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York,
NY, USA, 2013. a, b
Johnson, G., Lyman, J., and Loeb, N.: Improving estimates of Earth's energy
imbalance, Nat. Clim. Change, 6, 639–640, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3043, 2016. a, b, c
Jones, A. D., Calvin, K. V., Collins, W. D., and Edmonds, J.: Accounting for
radiative forcing from albedo change in future global land-use scenarios,
Clim. Change, 131, 691–703, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1411-5, 2015. a, b, c
Joos, F., Roth, R., Fuglestvedt, J. S., Peters, G. P., Enting, I. G.,
von Bloh, W., Brovkin, V., Burke, E. J., Eby, M., Edwards, N. R., Friedrich,
T., Frölicher, T. L., Halloran, P. R., Holden, P. B., Jones, C.,
Kleinen, T., Mackenzie, F. T., Matsumoto, K., Meinshausen, M., Plattner,
G.-K., Reisinger, A., Segschneider, J., Shaffer, G., Steinacher, M.,
Strassmann, K., Tanaka, K., Timmermann, A., and Weaver, A. J.: Carbon
dioxide and climate impulse response functions for the computation of
greenhouse gas metrics: a multi-model analysis, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13,
2793–2825, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2793-2013, 2013. a, b, c
Kristiansen, N. I., Stohl, A., Olivié, D. J. L., Croft, B., Søvde, O. A.,
Klein, H., Christoudias, T., Kunkel, D., Leadbetter, S. J., Lee, Y. H.,
Zhang, K., Tsigaridis, K., Bergman, T., Evangeliou, N., Wang, H., Ma, P.-L.,
Easter, R. C., Rasch, P. J., Liu, X., Pitari, G., Di Genova, G., Zhao, S. Y.,
Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Faluvegi, G. S., Kokkola, H., Martin, R. V.,
Pierce, J. R., Schulz, M., Shindell, D., Tost, H., and Zhang, H.: Evaluation
of observed and modelled aerosol lifetimes using radioactive tracers of
opportunity and an ensemble of 19 global models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16,
3525–3561, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3525-2016, 2016. a
Lamarque, J.-F., Bond, T. C., Eyring, V., Granier, C., Heil, A., Klimont, Z.,
Lee, D., Liousse, C., Mieville, A., Owen, B., Schultz, M. G., Shindell, D.,
Smith, S. J., Stehfest, E., Van Aardenne, J., Cooper, O. R., Kainuma, M.,
Mahowald, N., McConnell, J. R., Naik, V., Riahi, K., and van Vuuren, D. P.:
Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions
of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 10, 7017–7039, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010, 2010. a, b
Le Quéré, C., Andrew, R. M., Canadell, J. G., Sitch, S., Korsbakken, J. I.,
Peters, G. P., Manning, A. C., Boden, T. A., Tans, P. P., Houghton, R. A.,
Keeling, R. F., Alin, S., Andrews, O. D., Anthoni, P., Barbero, L., Bopp, L.,
Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Ciais, P., Currie, K., Delire, C., Doney,
S. C., Friedlingstein, P., Gkritzalis, T., Harris, I., Hauck, J., Haverd, V.,
Hoppema, M., Klein Goldewijk, K., Jain, A. K., Kato, E., Körtzinger, A.,
Landschützer, P., Lefèvre, N., Lenton, A., Lienert, S., Lombardozzi, D.,
Melton, J. R., Metzl, N., Millero, F., Monteiro, P. M. S., Munro, D. R.,
Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., O'Brien, K., Olsen, A., Omar, A. M., Ono,
T., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Rödenbeck, C., Salisbury, J., Schuster, U.,
Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Skjelvan, I., Stocker, B. D., Sutton, A. J.,
Takahashi, T., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., van der Laan-Luijkx, I. T., van der
Werf, G. R., Viovy, N., Walker, A. P., Wiltshire, A. J., and Zaehle, S.:
Global Carbon Budget 2016, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 605–649,
https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-605-2016, 2016. a
Lee, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Newton, P. J., Wit, R. C., Lim,
L. L., Owen, B., and Sausen, R.: Aviation and global climate change in the
21st century, Atmos. Environ., 43, 3520–3537,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.04.024, 2009. a
MacDougall, A. H., Zickfeld, K., Knutti, R., and Matthews, H. D.: Sensitivity
of carbon budgets to permafrost carbon feedbacks and non-CO2 forcings,
Environ. Res. Lett., 10, 125003,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/12/125003, 2015. a
Matthes, K., Funke, B., Andersson, M. E., Barnard, L., Beer, J., Charbonneau,
P., Clilverd, M. A., Dudok de Wit, T., Haberreiter, M., Hendry, A., Jackman,
C. H., Kretzschmar, M., Kruschke, T., Kunze, M., Langematz, U., Marsh, D. R.,
Maycock, A. C., Misios, S., Rodger, C. J., Scaife, A. A., Seppälä, A.,
Shangguan, M., Sinnhuber, M., Tourpali, K., Usoskin, I., van de Kamp, M.,
Verronen, P. T., and Versick, S.: Solar forcing for CMIP6 (v3.2), Geosci.
Model Dev., 10, 2247–2302, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2247-2017, 2017. a
Matthews, H. and Zickfeld, K.: Climate response to zeroed emissions of
greenhouse gases and aerosols, Nat. Clim. Change, 2, 338–341,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1424, 2012. a
Meinshausen, M., Raper, S., and Wigley, T.: Emulating coupled atmosphere-ocean
and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6 – Part 1: Model
description and calibration, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 1417–1456,
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-1417-2011, 2011a. a, b, c, d
Meinshausen, M., Smith, S., Calvin, K., Daniel, J., Kainuma, M., Lamarque,
J.-F., Matsumoto, K., Montzka, S., Raper, S., Riahi, K., Thomson, A.,
Velders, G., and van Vuuren, D.: The RCP Greenhouse Gas Concentrations and
their Extension from 1765 to 2300, Clim. Change,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0156-z, 2011b. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, p, q, r
Millar, R., Allen, M., Rogelj, J., and Friedlingstein, P.: The cumulative
carbon budget and its implications, Oxford Rev. Econ. Pol, 32, 323–342,
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grw009, 2016. a
Millar, R. J., Nicholls, Z. R., Friedlingstein, P., and Allen, M. R.: A
modified impulse-response representation of the global near-surface air
temperature and atmospheric concentration response to carbon dioxide
emissions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 2017, 7213–7228,
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7213-2017, 2017. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l
Morice, C. P., Kennedy, J. J., Rayner, N. A., and Jones, P. D.: Quantifying
uncertainties in global and regional temperature change using an ensemble of
observational estimates: The HadCRUT4 dataset, J. Geophys. Res., 117,
D08101, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017187, 2012. a
Moss, R. H., Edmonds, J. A., Hibbard, K. A., Manning, M. R., Rose, S. K.,
Vuuren, D. P. v., Carter, T. R., Emori, S., Kainuma, M., Kram, T., Meehl,
G. A., Mitchell, J. F. B., Nakicenovic, N., Riahi, K., Smith, S. J.,
Stouffer, R. J., Thomson, A. M., Weyant, J. P., and Wilbanks, T. J.: The next
generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment, Nature,
463, 747–756, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08823, 2010. a
Myhre, G. and Myhre, A.: Uncertainties in Radiative Forcing due to Surface
Albedo Changes Caused by Land-Use Changes, J. Climate, 16, 1511–1524,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442-16.10.1511, 2003. a
Myhre, G., Highwood, E. J., Shine, K. P., and Stordal, F.: New estimates of
radiative forcing due to well mixed greenhouse gases, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
25, 2715–2718, https://doi.org/10.1029/98GL01908, 1998. a, b
Myhre, G., Samset, B. H., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen,
T. K., Bian, H., Bellouin, N., Chin, M., Diehl, T., Easter, R. C., Feichter,
J., Ghan, S. J., Hauglustaine, D., Iversen, T., Kinne, S., Kirkevåg, A.,
Lamarque, J.-F., Lin, G., Liu, X., Lund, M. T., Luo, G., Ma, X., van Noije,
T., Penner, J. E., Rasch, P. J., Ruiz, A., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B.,
Stier, P., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., Wang, P., Wang, Z., Xu, L., Yu, H.,
Yu, F., Yoon, J.-H., Zhang, K., Zhang, H., and Zhou, C.: Radiative forcing
of the direct aerosol effect from AeroCom Phase II simulations, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 13, 1853–1877, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1853-2013, 2013a. a
Myhre, G., Shindell, D., Bréon, F.-M., Collins, W., Fuglestvedt, J., Huang,
J., Koch, D., Lamarque, J.-F., Lee, D., Mendoza, B., Nakajima, T., Robock,
A., Stephens, G., Takemura, T., and Zhang, H.: Anthropogenic and Natural
Radiative Forcing, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T., Qin, D.,
Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y.,
Bex, V., and Midgley, P., 659–740, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2013b. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l
Newman, P. A., Daniel, J. S., Waugh, D. W., and Nash, E. R.: A new formulation
of equivalent effective stratospheric chlorine (EESC), Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
7, 4537–4552, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-4537-2007, 2007. a
OMS: Oxford Martin School Net Zero Carbon Investment Initiative, GitHub
repository, FAIR, GitHub, available at: https://github.com/OMS-NetZero/FAIR (last access 8 May 2018),
2017.
Otto, A., Otto, F. E. L., Boucher, O., Church, J., Hegerl, G., Forster, P. M.,
Gillett, N. P., Gregory, J., Johnson, G. C., Knutti, R., Lewis, N., Lohmann,
U., Marotzke, J., Myhre, G., Shindell, D., Stevens, B., and Allen, M. R.:
Energy budget constraints on climate response, Nat. Geosci., 6, 415–416,
https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1836, 2013. a, b
Pielke, R. A., Marland, G., Betts, R. A., Chase, T. N., Eastman, J. L., Niles,
J. O., Niyogi, D. D. S., and Running, S. W.: The Influence of Land-Use Change
and Landscape Dynamics on the Climate System: Relevance to Climate-Change
Policy beyond the Radiative Effect of Greenhouse Gases, Philos. T. R. Soc. A,
360, 1705–1719, 2002. a
Prather, M. J., Holmes, C. D., and Hsu, J.: Reactive greenhouse gas scenarios:
Systematic exploration of uncertainties and the role of atmospheric
chemistry, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, l09803, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051440, 2012. a, b
Pueyo, S.: Solution to the paradox of climate sensitivity, Climatic change,
113, 163–179, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0328-x, 2012. a, b
RCP Database: RCP Database version 2.0 hosted at IIASA,
available at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web-apps/tnt/RcpDb (last access: 27 July 2017), 2009. a
Richardson, M., Cowtan, K., Hawkins, E., and Stolpe, M. B.: Reconciled climate
response estimates from climate models and the energy budget of Earth, Nat.
Clim. Change, 6, 931–935, 2016. a
Santer, B. D., Thorne, P. W., Haimberger, L., Taylor, K. E., Wigley, T. M. L.,
Lanzante, J. R., Solomon, S., Free, M., Gleckler, P. J., Jones, P. D., Karl,
T. R., Klein, S. A., Mears, C., Nychka, D., Schmidt, G. A., Sherwood, S. C.,
and Wentz, F. J.: Consistency of modelled and observed temperature trends in
the tropical troposphere, Int. J. Climatol., 28, 1703–1722,
https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1756, 2008. a
Shindell, D. T., Faluvegi, G., Koch, D. M., Schmidt, G. A., Unger, N., and
Bauer, S. E.: Improved Attribution of Climate Forcing to Emissions, Science,
326, 716–718, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1174760, 2009. a
Skeie, R., Berntsen, T., Myhre, G., Tanaka, K., Kvalevåg, M., and Hoyle,
C.: Anthropogenic radiative forcing time series from pre-industrial times
until 2010, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 11827–11857,
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11827-2011, 2011. a, b, c
Smith, C. J., Millar, R., Nicholls, Z., Allen, M., Forster, P., Leach, N.,
Passerello, G., and Regayre, L.: FAIR – Finite Amplitude Impulse Response Model
(multi-forcing version) (version 1.3.2), available at:
https://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1247897, last access: 16 May 2018.
Stevens, B.: Rethinking the Lower Bound on Aerosol Radiative Forcing, J.
Climate, 28, 4794–4819, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00656.1, 2015. a
Stevens, B., Sherwood, S. C., Bony, S., and Webb, M. J.: Prospects for
narrowing bounds on Earth's equilibrium climate sensitivity, Earth's Future,
4, 512–522, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000376, 2016. a
Stevenson, D. S., Young, P. J., Naik, V., Lamarque, J.-F., Shindell, D. T.,
Voulgarakis, A., Skeie, R. B., Dalsoren, S. B., Myhre, G., Berntsen, T. K.,
Folberth, G. A., Rumbold, S. T., Collins, W. J., MacKenzie, I. A., Doherty,
R. M., Zeng, G., van Noije, T. P. C., Strunk, A., Bergmann, D.,
Cameron-Smith, P., Plummer, D. A., Strode, S. A., Horowitz, L., Lee, Y. H.,
Szopa, S., Sudo, K., Nagashima, T., Josse, B., Cionni, I., Righi, M., Eyring,
V., Conley, A., Bowman, K. W., Wild, O., and Archibald, A.: Tropospheric
ozone changes, radiative forcing and attribution to emissions in the
Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP),
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 3063–3085, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3063-2013, 2013. a, b, c, d, e, f
Tachiiri, K., Hajima, T., and Kawamiya, M.: Increase of uncertainty in
transient climate response to cumulative carbon emissions after stabilization
of atmospheric CO2 concentration, Environ. Res. Lett., 10, 125018, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/12/125018, 2015. a
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5 and the
Experiment Design, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 485–498,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1, 2012. a
Thompson, D. W. J., Barnes, E. A., Deser, C., Foust, W. E., and Phillips,
A. S.: Quantifying the Role of Internal Climate Variability in Future Climate
Trends, J. Climate, 28, 6443–6456, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00830.1, 2015. a
Tokarska, K. B., Gillett, N. P., Arora, V. K., Lee, W. G., and Zickfeld, K.:
The influence of non-CO2 forcings on cumulative carbon emissions budgets,
Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 034039, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaafdd,
2018. a
Toohey, M., Stevens, B., Schmidt, H., and Timmreck, C.: Easy Volcanic Aerosol
(EVA v1.0): an idealized forcing generator for climate simulations, Geosci.
Model Dev., 9, 4049–4070, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4049-2016, 2016.
a
Twomey, S.: The influence of pollution on the shortwave albedo of clouds, J.
Atmos. Sci., 34, 1149–1152, 1977. a
Walters, D., Baran, A., Boutle, I., Brooks, M., Earnshaw, P., Edwards, J.,
Furtado, K., Hill, P., Lock, A., Manners, J., Morcrette, C., Mulcahy, J.,
Sanchez, C., Smith, C., Stratton, R., Tennant, W., Tomassini, L.,
Van Weverberg, K., Vosper, S., Willett, M., Browse, J., Bushell, A., Dalvi,
M., Essery, R., Gedney, N., Hardiman, S., Johnson, B., Johnson, C., Jones,
A., Mann, G., Milton, S., Rumbold, H., Sellar, A., Ujiie, M., Whitall, M.,
Williams, K., and Zerroukat, M.: The Met Office Unified Model Global
Atmosphere 7.0/7.1 and JULES Global Land 7.0 configurations, Geosci. Model
Dev. Discuss., 2017, 1–78, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2017-291, 2017. a
Zhang, H.-M., Huang, B., Lawrimore, J., Menne, M., and Smith, T.: NOAA Global
Surface Temperature Dataset (NOAAGlobalTemp), Version 4.0. NOAA National
Centers for Environmental Information, https://doi.org/10.7289/V5FN144H, 2017. a
Short summary
FAIR v1.3 is a simple Python-based climate model emulator. It takes emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosol and ozone precursors to calculate radiative forcing and temperature change. It includes a simple representation of carbon cycle feedbacks due to temperature and accumulated carbon uptake. Large ensembles can be run with minimal computational expense for any user-specified emissions pathway. We produce such an ensemble using the RCP emissions datasets.
FAIR v1.3 is a simple Python-based climate model emulator. It takes emissions of greenhouse...
