Articles | Volume 14, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-935-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-935-2021
Model evaluation paper
 | 
12 Feb 2021
Model evaluation paper |  | 12 Feb 2021

Evaluation of polar stratospheric clouds in the global chemistry–climate model SOCOLv3.1 by comparison with CALIPSO spaceborne lidar measurements

Michael Steiner, Beiping Luo, Thomas Peter, Michael C. Pitts, and Andrea Stenke

Related authors

Flow-dependent observation errors for GHG inversions in an ensemble Kalman smoother
Michael Steiner, Luca Cantarello, Stephan Henne, and Dominik Brunner
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1426,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1426, 2024
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
European CH4 inversions with ICON-ART coupled to the CarbonTracker Data Assimilation Shell
Michael Steiner, Wouter Peters, Ingrid Luijkx, Stephan Henne, Huilin Chen, Samuel Hammer, and Dominik Brunner
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 2759–2782, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-2759-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-2759-2024, 2024
Short summary
High potential for CH4 emission mitigation from oil infrastructure in one of EU's major production regions
Foteini Stavropoulou, Katarina Vinković, Bert Kers, Marcel de Vries, Steven van Heuven, Piotr Korbeń, Martina Schmidt, Julia Wietzel, Pawel Jagoda, Jaroslav M. Necki, Jakub Bartyzel, Hossein Maazallahi, Malika Menoud, Carina van der Veen, Sylvia Walter, Béla Tuzson, Jonas Ravelid, Randulph Paulo Morales, Lukas Emmenegger, Dominik Brunner, Michael Steiner, Arjan Hensen, Ilona Velzeboer, Pim van den Bulk, Hugo Denier van der Gon, Antonio Delre, Maklawe Essonanawe Edjabou, Charlotte Scheutz, Marius Corbu, Sebastian Iancu, Denisa Moaca, Alin Scarlat, Alexandru Tudor, Ioana Vizireanu, Andreea Calcan, Magdalena Ardelean, Sorin Ghemulet, Alexandru Pana, Aurel Constantinescu, Lucian Cusa, Alexandru Nica, Calin Baciu, Cristian Pop, Andrei Radovici, Alexandru Mereuta, Horatiu Stefanie, Alexandru Dandocsi, Bas Hermans, Stefan Schwietzke, Daniel Zavala-Araiza, Huilin Chen, and Thomas Röckmann
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 10399–10412, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-10399-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-10399-2023, 2023
Short summary
Mountain-wave-induced polar stratospheric clouds and their representation in the global chemistry model ICON-ART
Michael Weimer, Jennifer Buchmüller, Lars Hoffmann, Ole Kirner, Beiping Luo, Roland Ruhnke, Michael Steiner, Ines Tritscher, and Peter Braesicke
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9515–9543, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9515-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9515-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
Implementing detailed nucleation predictions in the Earth system model EC-Earth3.3.4: sulfuric acid–ammonia nucleation
Carl Svenhag, Moa K. Sporre, Tinja Olenius, Daniel Yazgi, Sara M. Blichner, Lars P. Nieradzik, and Pontus Roldin
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4923–4942, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4923-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4923-2024, 2024
Short summary
Modeling biochar effects on soil organic carbon on croplands in a microbial decomposition model (MIMICS-BC_v1.0)
Mengjie Han, Qing Zhao, Xili Wang, Ying-Ping Wang, Philippe Ciais, Haicheng Zhang, Daniel S. Goll, Lei Zhu, Zhe Zhao, Zhixuan Guo, Chen Wang, Wei Zhuang, Fengchang Wu, and Wei Li
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4871–4890, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4871-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4871-2024, 2024
Short summary
Hector V3.2.0: functionality and performance of a reduced-complexity climate model
Kalyn Dorheim, Skylar Gering, Robert Gieseke, Corinne Hartin, Leeya Pressburger, Alexey N. Shiklomanov, Steven J. Smith, Claudia Tebaldi, Dawn L. Woodard, and Ben Bond-Lamberty
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4855–4869, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4855-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4855-2024, 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
Assessment of a tiling energy budget approach in a land surface model, ORCHIDEE-MICT (r8205)
Yi Xi, Chunjing Qiu, Yuan Zhang, Dan Zhu, Shushi Peng, Gustaf Hugelius, Jinfeng Chang, Elodie Salmon, and Philippe Ciais
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4727–4754, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4727-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4727-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Akiyoshi, H., Zhou, L. B., Yamashita, Y., Sakamoto, K., Yoshiki, M., Nagashima, T., Takahashi, M., Kurokawa, J., Takigawa, M., and Imamura, T.: A CCM simulation of the breakup of the Antarctic polar vortex in the years 1980–2004 under the CCMVal scenarios, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D03103, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd009261, 2009. a
Biele, J., Tsias, A., Luo, B. P., Carslaw, K. S., Neuber, R., Beyerle, G., and Peter, T.: Nonequilibrium coexistence of solid and liquid particles in Arctic stratospheric clouds, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 22991–23007, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001jd900188, 2001. a, b
Brühl, C., Steil, B., Stiller, G., Funke, B., and Jöckel, P.: Nitrogen compounds and ozone in the stratosphere: comparison of MIPAS satellite data with the chemistry climate model ECHAM5/MESSy1, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5585–5598, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5585-2007, 2007. a
Carslaw, K. S., Luo, B. P., and Peter, T.: An analytic expression for the composition of aqueous HNO3−H2SO4 stratospheric aerosols including gas-phase removal of HNO3, Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 1877–1880, https://doi.org/10.1029/95gl01668, 1995. a, b
Carslaw, K. S., Peter, T., Bacmeister, J. T., and Eckermann, S. D.: Widespread solid particle formation by mountain waves in the Arctic stratosphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104, 1827–1836, https://doi.org/10.1029/1998JD100033, 1999. a
Download
Short summary
We evaluate polar stratospheric clouds (PSCs) as simulated by the chemistry–climate model (CCM) SOCOLv3.1 in comparison with measurements by the CALIPSO satellite. A cold bias results in an overestimated PSC area and mountain-wave ice is underestimated, but we find overall good temporal and spatial agreement of PSC occurrence and composition. This work confirms previous studies indicating that simplified PSC schemes may also achieve good approximations of the fundamental properties of PSCs.