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
The real challenges for climate and weather modelling on its way to sustained exascale performance: a case study using ICON (v2.6.6)
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
Improving the representation of major Indian crops in the Community Land Model version 5.0 (CLM5) using site-scale crop data
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
Evaluation of CORDEX ERA5-forced NARCliM2.0 regional climate models over Australia using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model version 4.1.2
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
Design, evaluation, and future projections of the NARCliM2.0 CORDEX-CMIP6 Australasia regional climate ensemble
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
Amending the algorithm of aerosol–radiation interactions in WRF-Chem (v4.4)
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

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.
Share