Articles | Volume 12, issue 8
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3609-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3609-2019
Model evaluation paper
 | 
21 Aug 2019
Model evaluation paper |  | 21 Aug 2019

The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 2: Cloud evaluation, aerosol radiative forcing, and climate sensitivity

David Neubauer, Sylvaine Ferrachat, Colombe Siegenthaler-Le Drian, Philip Stier, Daniel G. Partridge, Ina Tegen, Isabelle Bey, Tanja Stanelle, Harri Kokkola, and Ulrike Lohmann

Related authors

Cirrus formation regimes – Data driven identification and quantification of mineral dust effect
Kai Jeggle, David Neubauer, Hanin Binder, and Ulrike Lohmann
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2559,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2559, 2024
Short summary
Investigating the sign of stratocumulus adjustments to aerosols in the ICON global storm-resolving model
Emilie Fons, Ann Kristin Naumann, David Neubauer, Theresa Lang, and Ulrike Lohmann
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 8653–8675, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8653-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8653-2024, 2024
Short summary
Decomposing the effective radiative forcing of anthropogenic aerosols based on CMIP6 Earth system models
Alkiviadis Kalisoras, Aristeidis K. Georgoulias, Dimitris Akritidis, Robert J. Allen, Vaishali Naik, Chaincy Kuo, Sophie Szopa, Pierre Nabat, Dirk Olivié, Twan van Noije, Philippe Le Sager, David Neubauer, Naga Oshima, Jane Mulcahy, Larry W. Horowitz, and Prodromos Zanis
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7837–7872, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7837-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7837-2024, 2024
Short summary
General circulation models simulate negative liquid water path–droplet number correlations, but anthropogenic aerosols still increase simulated liquid water path
Johannes Mülmenstädt, Edward Gryspeerdt, Sudhakar Dipu, Johannes Quaas, Andrew S. Ackerman, Ann M. Fridlind, Florian Tornow, Susanne E. Bauer, Andrew Gettelman, Yi Ming, Youtong Zheng, Po-Lun Ma, Hailong Wang, Kai Zhang, Matthew W. Christensen, Adam C. Varble, L. Ruby Leung, Xiaohong Liu, David Neubauer, Daniel G. Partridge, Philip Stier, and Toshihiko Takemura
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7331–7345, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7331-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7331-2024, 2024
Short summary
Evaluation of CMIP6 model simulations of PM2.5 and its components over China
Fangxuan Ren, Jintai Lin, Chenghao Xu, Jamiu A. Adeniran, Jingxu Wang, Randall V. Martin, Aaron van Donkelaar, Melanie S. Hammer, Larry W. Horowitz, Steven T. Turnock, Naga Oshima, Jie Zhang, Susanne Bauer, Kostas Tsigaridis, Øyvind Seland, Pierre Nabat, David Neubauer, Gary Strand, Twan van Noije, Philippe Le Sager, and Toshihiko Takemura
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4821–4836, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4821-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4821-2024, 2024
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
CARIB12: a regional Community Earth System Model/Modular Ocean Model 6 configuration of the Caribbean Sea
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
Architectural insights into and training methodology optimization of Pangu-Weather
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
Evaluation of global fire simulations in CMIP6 Earth system models
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
Evaluating downscaled products with expected hydroclimatic co-variances
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
Software sustainability of global impact models
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

Cited articles

Abdul-Razzak, H. and Ghan, S. J.: A parameterization of aerosol activation 2. Multiple aerosol types, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 6837–6844, 2000. 
Adler, R. F., Gu, G., and Huffman, G. J.: Estimating Climatological Bias Errors for the Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP), J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 51, 84–99, 2012. 
Adler, R. F., Sapiano, M. R. P., Huffman, G. J., Wang, J.-J., Gu, G., Bolvin, D., Chiu, L., Schneider, U., Becker, A., Nelkin, E., Xie, P., Ferraro, R., and Shin, D.-B.: The Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP) Monthly Analysis (New Version 2.3) and a Review of 2017 Global Precipitation, Atmosphere, 9, 138, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos9040138, 2018. 
Barahona, D., West, R. E. L., Stier, P., Romakkaniemi, S., Kokkola, H., and Nenes, A.: Comprehensively accounting for the effect of giant CCN in cloud activation parameterizations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 2467–2473, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-2467-2010, 2010. 
Barkstrom, B. R.: The Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE), B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 65, 1170–1185, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1984)065<1170:TERBE>2.0.CO;2, 1984. 
Short summary
The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 as well as the previous model versions ECHAM5.5–HAM2.0 and ECHAM6.1–HAM2.2 are evaluated. The simulation of clouds has improved in ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3. This has an impact on effective radiative forcing due to aerosol–radiation and aerosol–cloud interactions and equilibrium climate sensitivity, which are weaker in ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 than in the previous model versions.