Articles | Volume 16, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1569-2023
© Author(s) 2023. 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-16-1569-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
20 Mar 2023
Development and technical paper |
| 20 Mar 2023
| 20 Mar 2023
UKESM1.1: development and evaluation of an updated configuration of the UK Earth System Model
Jane P. Mulcahy
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Colin G. Jones
National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Steven T. Rumbold
National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, UK
Till Kuhlbrodt
National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, UK
Andrea J. Dittus
National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, UK
Edward W. Blockley
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Andrew Yool
National Oceanography Centre, Southampton, UK
Jeremy Walton
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Catherine Hardacre
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Timothy Andrews
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Alejandro Bodas-Salcedo
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Marc Stringer
National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, UK
Lee de Mora
Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Plymouth, UK
Phil Harris
UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, UK
Richard Hill
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Doug Kelley
UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, UK
Eddy Robertson
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Yongming Tang
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Related authors
Martin Richard Willett, Melissa Brooks, Andrew Bushell, Paul Earnshaw, Samantha Smith, Lorenzo Tomassini, Martin Best, Ian Boutle, Jennifer Brooke, John M. Edwards, Kalli Furtado, Catherine Hardacre, Andrew J. Hartley, Alan Hewitt, Ben Johnson, Adrian Lock, Andy Malcolm, Jane Mulcahy, Eike Müller, Heather Rumbold, Gabriel G. Rooney, Alistair Sellar, Masashi Ujiie, Annelize van Niekerk, Andy Wiltshire, and Michael Whitall
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1829, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1829, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Global Atmosphere (GA) configurations of the Unified Model (UM) and Global Land (GL) configurations of JULES are developed for use in any global atmospheric modelling application. We describe a recent iteration of these configurations, GA8GL9, which includes improvements to the represenation of convection and other physical processes. GA8GL9 is used for operational weather prediction in the UK and forms the basis for the next GA and GL configuration.
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
Short summary
Effective radiative forcing (ERF) is a metric for estimating how human activities and natural agents change the energy flow into and out of the Earth’s climate system. We investigate the anthropogenic aerosol ERF, and we estimate the contribution of individual processes to the total ERF using simulations from Earth system models within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). Our findings highlight that aerosol–cloud interactions drive ERF variability during the last 150 years.
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.
George Manville, Thomas G. Bell, Jane P. Mulcahy, Rafel Simó, Martí Galí, Anoop S. Mahajan, Shrivardhan Hulswar, and Paul R. Halloran
Biogeosciences, 20, 1813–1828, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1813-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1813-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present the first global investigation of controls on seawater dimethylsulfide (DMS) spatial variability over scales of up to 100 km. Sea surface height anomalies, density, and chlorophyll a help explain almost 80 % of DMS variability. The results suggest that physical and biogeochemical processes play an equally important role in controlling DMS variability. These data provide independent confirmation that existing parameterisations of seawater DMS concentration use appropriate variables.
Edward Gryspeerdt, Adam C. Povey, Roy G. Grainger, Otto Hasekamp, N. Christina Hsu, Jane P. Mulcahy, Andrew M. Sayer, and Armin Sorooshian
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 4115–4122, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4115-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4115-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The impact of aerosols on clouds is one of the largest uncertainties in the human forcing of the climate. Aerosol can increase the concentrations of droplets in clouds, but observational and model studies produce widely varying estimates of this effect. We show that these estimates can be reconciled if only polluted clouds are studied, but this is insufficient to constrain the climate impact of aerosol. The uncertainty in aerosol impact on clouds is currently driven by cases with little aerosol.
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.
Ville Leinonen, Harri Kokkola, Taina Yli-Juuti, Tero Mielonen, Thomas Kühn, Tuomo Nieminen, Simo Heikkinen, Tuuli Miinalainen, Tommi Bergman, Ken Carslaw, Stefano Decesari, Markus Fiebig, Tareq Hussein, Niku Kivekäs, Radovan Krejci, Markku Kulmala, Ari Leskinen, Andreas Massling, Nikos Mihalopoulos, Jane P. Mulcahy, Steffen M. Noe, Twan van Noije, Fiona M. O'Connor, Colin O'Dowd, Dirk Olivie, Jakob B. Pernov, Tuukka Petäjä, Øyvind Seland, Michael Schulz, Catherine E. Scott, Henrik Skov, Erik Swietlicki, Thomas Tuch, Alfred Wiedensohler, Annele Virtanen, and Santtu Mikkonen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12873–12905, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12873-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12873-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We provide the first extensive comparison of detailed aerosol size distribution trends between in situ observations from Europe and five different earth system models. We investigated aerosol modes (nucleation, Aitken, and accumulation) separately and were able to show the differences between measured and modeled trends and especially their seasonal patterns. The differences in model results are likely due to complex effects of several processes instead of certain specific model features.
Jie Zhang, Kalli Furtado, Steven T. Turnock, Jane P. Mulcahy, Laura J. Wilcox, Ben B. Booth, David Sexton, Tongwen Wu, Fang Zhang, and Qianxia Liu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 18609–18627, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18609-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18609-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The CMIP6 ESMs systematically underestimate TAS anomalies in the NH midlatitudes, especially from 1960 to 1990. The anomalous cooling is concurrent in time and space with anthropogenic SO2 emissions. The spurious drop in TAS is attributed to the overestimated aerosol concentrations. The aerosol forcing sensitivity cannot well explain the inter-model spread of PHC biases. And the cloud-amount term accounts for most of the inter-model spread in aerosol forcing sensitivity.
Catherine Hardacre, Jane P. Mulcahy, Richard J. Pope, Colin G. Jones, Steven T. Rumbold, Can Li, Colin Johnson, and Steven T. Turnock
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 18465–18497, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18465-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18465-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate UKESM1's ability to represent the sulfur (S) cycle in the recent historical period. The S cycle is a key driver of historical radiative forcing. Earth system models such as UKESM1 should represent the S cycle well so that we can have confidence in their projections of future climate. We compare UKESM1 to observations of sulfur compounds, finding that the model generally performs well. We also identify areas for UKESM1’s development, focussing on how SO2 is removed from the air.
Anthony C. Jones, Adrian Hill, Samuel Remy, N. Luke Abraham, Mohit Dalvi, Catherine Hardacre, Alan J. Hewitt, Ben Johnson, Jane P. Mulcahy, and Steven T. Turnock
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 15901–15927, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15901-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15901-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Ammonium nitrate is hard to model because it forms and evaporates rapidly. One approach is to relate its equilibrium concentration to temperature, humidity, and the amount of nitric acid and ammonia gases. Using this approach, we limit the rate at which equilibrium is reached using various condensation rates in a climate model. We show that ammonium nitrate concentrations are highly sensitive to the condensation rate. Our results will help improve the representation of nitrate in climate models.
Josué Bock, Martine Michou, Pierre Nabat, Manabu Abe, Jane P. Mulcahy, Dirk J. L. Olivié, Jörg Schwinger, Parvadha Suntharalingam, Jerry Tjiputra, Marco van Hulten, Michio Watanabe, Andrew Yool, and Roland Séférian
Biogeosciences, 18, 3823–3860, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3823-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3823-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we analyse surface ocean dimethylsulfide (DMS) concentration and flux to the atmosphere from four CMIP6 Earth system models over the historical and ssp585 simulations.
Our analysis of contemporary (1980–2009) climatologies shows that models better reproduce observations in mid to high latitudes. The models disagree on the sign of the trend of the global DMS flux from 1980 onwards. The models agree on a positive trend of DMS over polar latitudes following sea-ice retreat dynamics.
Fiona M. O'Connor, N. Luke Abraham, Mohit Dalvi, Gerd A. Folberth, Paul T. Griffiths, Catherine Hardacre, Ben T. Johnson, Ron Kahana, James Keeble, Byeonghyeon Kim, Olaf Morgenstern, Jane P. Mulcahy, Mark Richardson, Eddy Robertson, Jeongbyn Seo, Sungbo Shim, João C. Teixeira, Steven T. Turnock, Jonny Williams, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Stephanie Woodward, and Guang Zeng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1211–1243, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1211-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1211-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper calculates how changes in emissions and/or concentrations of different atmospheric constituents since the pre-industrial era have altered the Earth's energy budget at the present day using a metric called effective radiative forcing. The impact of land use change is also assessed. We find that individual contributions do not add linearly, and different Earth system interactions can affect the magnitude of the calculated effective radiative forcing.
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.
Jane P. Mulcahy, Colin Johnson, Colin G. Jones, Adam C. Povey, Catherine E. Scott, Alistair Sellar, Steven T. Turnock, Matthew T. Woodhouse, Nathan Luke Abraham, Martin B. Andrews, Nicolas Bellouin, Jo Browse, Ken S. Carslaw, Mohit Dalvi, Gerd A. Folberth, Matthew Glover, Daniel P. Grosvenor, Catherine Hardacre, Richard Hill, Ben Johnson, Andy Jones, Zak Kipling, Graham Mann, James Mollard, Fiona M. O'Connor, Julien Palmiéri, Carly Reddington, Steven T. Rumbold, Mark Richardson, Nick A. J. Schutgens, Philip Stier, Marc Stringer, Yongming Tang, Jeremy Walton, Stephanie Woodward, and Andrew Yool
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 6383–6423, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6383-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6383-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosols are an important component of the Earth system. Here, we comprehensively document and evaluate the aerosol schemes as implemented in the physical and Earth system models, HadGEM3-GC3.1 and UKESM1. This study provides a useful characterisation of the aerosol climatology in both models, facilitating the understanding of the numerous aerosol–climate interaction studies that will be conducted for CMIP6 and beyond.
Douglas I. Kelley, Chantelle Burton, Francesca Di Giuseppe, Matthew W. Jones, Maria L. F. Barbosa, Esther Brambleby, Joe R. McNorton, Zhongwei Liu, Anna S. I. Bradley, Katie Blackford, Eleanor Burke, Andrew Ciavarella, Enza Di Tomaso, Jonathan Eden, Igor José M. Ferreira, Lukas Fiedler, Andrew J. Hartley, Theodore R. Keeping, Seppe Lampe, Anna Lombardi, Guilherme Mataveli, Yuquan Qu, Patrícia S. Silva, Fiona R. Spuler, Carmen B. Steinmann, Miguel Ángel Torres-Vázquez, Renata Veiga, Dave van Wees, Jakob B. Wessel, Emily Wright, Bibiana Bilbao, Mathieu Bourbonnais, Gao Cong, Carlos M. Di Bella, Kebonye Dintwe, Victoria M. Donovan, Sarah Harris, Elena A. Kukavskaya, Brigitte N’Dri, Cristina Santín, Galia Selaya, Johan Sjöström, John Abatzoglou, Niels Andela, Rachel Carmenta, Emilio Chuvieco, Louis Giglio, Douglas S. Hamilton, Stijn Hantson, Sarah Meier, Mark Parrington, Mojtaba Sadegh, Jesus San-Miguel-Ayanz, Fernando Sedano, Marco Turco, Guido R. van der Werf, Sander Veraverbeke, Liana O. Anderson, Hamish Clarke, Paulo M. Fernandes, and Crystal A. Kolden
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-483, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-483, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
The second State of Wildfires report examines extreme wildfire events from 2024 to early 2025. It analyses key regional events in Southern California, Northeast Amazonia, Pantanal-Chiquitano, and the Congo Basin, assessing their drivers, predictability, and attributing them to climate change and land use. Seasonal outlooks and decadal projections are provided. Climate change greatly increased the likelihood of these fires, and without strong mitigation, such events will become more frequent.
Adrian Peter Martin, Noelie Benoist, Brian Bett, Anieke Brombacher, Jennifer Durden, Sophy Oliver, and Andrew Yool
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2180, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2180, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Although seemingly inhospitable, under huge pressure and with permanent darkness, the seafloor has a diversity of organisms. They are almost entirely dependent on food sinking down through the ocean onto the seafloor. This model allows us to study how these organisms survive in this hostile environment. Making use of evidence that biological characteristics, like lifetime, vary with size and temperature, this model can simulate the fate of seafloor creatures from bacteria to large sea cucumbers.
Megan A. J. Brown, Nicola J . Warwick, Nathan Luke Abraham, Paul T. Griffiths, Steve T. Rumbold, Gerd A. Folberth, Fiona M. O'Connor, and Alex T. Archibald
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2676, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2676, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Hydrogen (H2) is an indirect greenhouse gas by increasing methane (CH4) lifetime. Interaction between H2 and CH4 is important for hydrogen’s global warming potential (GWP). Global models do not represent this interaction well; H2 or CH4 are prescribed at the surface. We implement an interactive H2 scheme into a global model coupled with interactive CH4. We simulate scenarios demonstrating its capability, improving model performance and more accurately representing H2-CH4 interaction.
Forrest M. Hoffman, Birgit Hassler, Ranjini Swaminathan, Jared Lewis, Bouwe Andela, Nathaniel Collier, Dóra Hegedűs, Jiwoo Lee, Charlotte Pascoe, Mika Pflüger, Martina Stockhause, Paul Ullrich, Min Xu, Lisa Bock, Felicity Chun, Bettina K. Gier, Douglas I. Kelley, Axel Lauer, Julien Lenhardt, Manuel Schlund, Mohanan G. Sreeush, Katja Weigel, Ed Blockley, Rebecca Beadling, Romain Beucher, Demiso D. Dugassa, Valerio Lembo, Jianhua Lu, Swen Brands, Jerry Tjiputra, Elizaveta Malinina, Brian Mederios, Enrico Scoccimarro, Jeremy Walton, Philip Kershaw, André L. Marquez, Malcolm J. Roberts, Eleanor O’Rourke, Elisabeth Dingley, Briony Turner, Helene Hewitt, and John P. Dunne
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
As Earth system models become more complex, rapid and comprehensive evaluation through comparison with observational data is necessary. The upcoming Assessment Fast Track for the Seventh Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7) will require fast analysis. This paper describes a new Rapid Evaluation Framework (REF) that was developed for the Assessment Fast Track that will be run at the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) to inform the community about the performance of models.
Joao C. M. Teixeira, Chantelle Burton, Douglas I. Kelley, Gerd A. Folberth, Fiona M. O'Connor, Richard A. Betts, and Apostolos Voulgarakis
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3066, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3066, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Earth System Dynamics (ESD).
Short summary
Short summary
Burnt areas produced by wildfires around the world are decreasing, especially in tropical regions, but many climate models fail to show this trend. Our study looks at whether adding a measure of human development to a fire model could improve its representation of these processes. We found that including these factors helped the model better match observations in many regions. This shows that human activity plays a key role in shaping fire trends.
Ricarda Winkelmann, Donovan P. Dennis, Jonathan F. Donges, Sina Loriani, Ann Kristin Klose, Jesse F. Abrams, Jorge Alvarez-Solas, Torsten Albrecht, David Armstrong McKay, Sebastian Bathiany, Javier Blasco Navarro, Victor Brovkin, Eleanor Burke, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Reik V. Donner, Markus Drüke, Goran Georgievski, Heiko Goelzer, Anna B. Harper, Gabriele Hegerl, Marina Hirota, Aixue Hu, Laura C. Jackson, Colin Jones, Hyungjun Kim, Torben Koenigk, Peter Lawrence, Timothy M. Lenton, Hannah Liddy, José Licón-Saláiz, Maxence Menthon, Marisa Montoya, Jan Nitzbon, Sophie Nowicki, Bette Otto-Bliesner, Francesco Pausata, Stefan Rahmstorf, Karoline Ramin, Alexander Robinson, Johan Rockström, Anastasia Romanou, Boris Sakschewski, Christina Schädel, Steven Sherwood, Robin S. Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Didier Swingedouw, Matteo Willeit, Wilbert Weijer, Richard Wood, Klaus Wyser, and Shuting Yang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1899, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1899, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Earth System Dynamics (ESD).
Short summary
Short summary
The Tipping Points Modelling Intercomparison Project (TIPMIP) is an international collaborative effort to systematically assess tipping point risks in the Earth system using state-of-the-art coupled and stand-alone domain models. TIPMIP will provide a first global atlas of potential tipping dynamics, respective critical thresholds and key uncertainties, generating an important building block towards a comprehensive scientific basis for policy- and decision-making.
Maria Lucia Ferreira Barbosa, Douglas I. Kelley, Chantelle A. Burton, Igor J. M. Ferreira, Renata Moura da Veiga, Anna Bradley, Paulo Guilherme Molin, and Liana O. Anderson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3533–3557, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3533-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3533-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
As fire seasons in Brazil become increasingly severe, confidently understanding the factors driving fires is more critical than ever. To address this challenge, we developed FLAME (Fire Landscape Analysis using Maximum Entropy), a new model designed to predict fires and to analyse the spatial influence of both environmental and human factors while accounting for uncertainties. By adapting the model to different regions, we can enhance fire management strategies, making FLAME a powerful tool for protecting landscapes in Brazil and beyond.
Davi Mignac, Jennifer Waters, Daniel J. Lea, Matthew J. Martin, James While, Anthony T. Weaver, Arthur Vidard, Catherine Guiavarc'h, Dave Storkey, David Ford, Edward W. Blockley, Jonathan Baker, Keith Haines, Martin R. Price, Michael J. Bell, and Richard Renshaw
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3405–3425, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3405-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3405-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We describe major improvements of the Met Office's global ocean–sea ice forecasting system. The models and the way observations are used to improve the forecasts were changed, which led to a significant error reduction of 1 d forecasts. The new system performance in past conditions, where subsurface observations are scarce, was improved with more consistent ocean heat content estimates. The new system will be of better use for climate studies and will provide improved forecasts for end users.
Amali A. Amali, Clemens Schwingshackl, Akihiko Ito, Alina Barbu, Christine Delire, Daniele Peano, David M. Lawrence, David Wårlind, Eddy Robertson, Edouard L. Davin, Elena Shevliakova, Ian N. Harman, Nicolas Vuichard, Paul A. Miller, Peter J. Lawrence, Tilo Ziehn, Tomohiro Hajima, Victor Brovkin, Yanwu Zhang, Vivek K. Arora, and Julia Pongratz
Earth Syst. Dynam., 16, 803–840, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-803-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-803-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study explored the impact of anthropogenic land-use change (LUC) on climate dynamics, focusing on biogeophysical (BGP) and biogeochemical (BGC) effects using data from the Land Use Model Intercomparison Project (LUMIP) and the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We found that LUC-induced carbon emissions contribute to a BGC warming of 0.21 °C, with BGC effects dominating globally over BGP effects, which show regional variability. Our findings highlight discrepancies in model simulations and emphasize the need for improved representations of LUC processes.
Laurent Bertino, Patrick Heimbach, Ed Blockley, and Einar Ólason
State Planet, 5-opsr, 14, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-14-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-5-opsr-14-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasts of sea ice are in high demand in the polar regions, and they are also quickly improving and becoming more easily accessible to non-experts. We provide here a brief status of the short-term forecasting services – typically 10 d ahead – and an outlook of their upcoming developments.
Katja Frieler, Stefan Lange, Jacob Schewe, Matthias Mengel, Simon Treu, Christian Otto, Jan Volkholz, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Stefanie Heinicke, Colin Jones, Julia L. Blanchard, Cheryl S. Harrison, Colleen M. Petrik, Tyler D. Eddy, Kelly Ortega-Cisneros, Camilla Novaglio, Ryan Heneghan, Derek P. Tittensor, Olivier Maury, Matthias Büchner, Thomas Vogt, Dánnell Quesada Chacón, Kerry Emanuel, Chia-Ying Lee, Suzana J. Camargo, Jonas Jägermeyr, Sam Rabin, Jochen Klar, Iliusi D. Vega del Valle, Lisa Novak, Inga J. Sauer, Gitta Lasslop, Sarah Chadburn, Eleanor Burke, Angela Gallego-Sala, Noah Smith, Jinfeng Chang, Stijn Hantson, Chantelle Burton, Anne Gädeke, Fang Li, Simon N. Gosling, Hannes Müller Schmied, Fred Hattermann, Thomas Hickler, Rafael Marcé, Don Pierson, Wim Thiery, Daniel Mercado-Bettín, Robert Ladwig, Ana Isabel Ayala-Zamora, Matthew Forrest, Michel Bechtold, Robert Reinecke, Inge de Graaf, Jed O. Kaplan, Alexander Koch, and Matthieu Lengaigne
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2103, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2103, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the experiments and data sets necessary to run historic and future impact projections, and the underlying assumptions of future climate change as defined by the 3rd round of the ISIMIP Project (Inter-sectoral Impactmodel Intercomparison Project, isimip.org). ISIMIP provides a framework for cross-sectorally consistent climate impact simulations to contribute to a comprehensive and consistent picture of the world under different climate-change scenarios.
Martin Richard Willett, Melissa Brooks, Andrew Bushell, Paul Earnshaw, Samantha Smith, Lorenzo Tomassini, Martin Best, Ian Boutle, Jennifer Brooke, John M. Edwards, Kalli Furtado, Catherine Hardacre, Andrew J. Hartley, Alan Hewitt, Ben Johnson, Adrian Lock, Andy Malcolm, Jane Mulcahy, Eike Müller, Heather Rumbold, Gabriel G. Rooney, Alistair Sellar, Masashi Ujiie, Annelize van Niekerk, Andy Wiltshire, and Michael Whitall
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1829, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1829, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Global Atmosphere (GA) configurations of the Unified Model (UM) and Global Land (GL) configurations of JULES are developed for use in any global atmospheric modelling application. We describe a recent iteration of these configurations, GA8GL9, which includes improvements to the represenation of convection and other physical processes. GA8GL9 is used for operational weather prediction in the UK and forms the basis for the next GA and GL configuration.
Alex E. West and Edward W. Blockley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3041–3064, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3041-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3041-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses ice mass balance buoys – temperature- and height-measuring devices frozen into sea ice – to find how well climate models simulate (1) melt and growth of Arctic sea ice and (2) conduction of heat through Arctic sea ice. This may help understand why models produce varying amounts of sea ice in the present day. We find that models tend to show more melt, growth or conduction for a given ice thickness than the buoys, although the difference is smaller for models with more physically realistic thermodynamics.
Martin Juckes, Karl E. Taylor, Fabrizio Antonio, David Brayshaw, Carlo Buontempo, Jian Cao, Paul J. Durack, Michio Kawamiya, Hyungjun Kim, Tomas Lovato, Chloe Mackallah, Matthew Mizielinski, Alessandra Nuzzo, Martina Stockhause, Daniele Visioni, Jeremy Walton, Briony Turner, Eleanor O'Rourke, and Beth Dingley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2639–2663, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2639-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2639-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Baseline Climate Variables for Earth System Modelling (ESM-BCVs) are defined as a list of 135 variables which have high utility for the evaluation and exploitation of climate simulations. The list reflects the most frequently used variables from Earth system models based on an assessment of data publication and download records from the largest archive of global climate projects.
Cameron McErlich, Felix Goddard, Alex Aves, Catherine Hardacre, Nikolaos Evangeliou, and Laura E. Revell
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1575, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1575, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Airborne microplastics are a new air pollutant but are not yet included in most global models. We add them to the UK Earth System Model to show how they move, change, and are removed from air. Smaller microplastics persist for longer and can travel further, even to Antarctica. While their current role in air pollution is small, their presence is expected to grow in future. This work offers a framework to assess future impacts of microplastics on air quality and climate.
Lukas Lindenlaub, Katja Weigel, Birgit Hassler, Colin Jones, and Veronika Eyring
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1517, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1517, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores changes in drought characteristic based on projections by 18 different Earth system models. Their performance is evaluated by comparing historical simulations to observation based reanalysis. The analysis of a standardized drought index under different future scenarios revealed that the harvest area that is projected to experience extreme drought conditions towards the end of this century ranges from 10 % to 40 % depending on the emission scenario.
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.
Inika Taylor, Douglas I. Kelley, Camilla Mathison, Karina E. Williams, Andrew J. Hartley, Richard A. Betts, and Chantelle Burton
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-720, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-720, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Climate change is reshaping fire seasons worldwide and, in many places, increasing fire weather risk. We use climate model simulations to project future changes in fire danger at different levels of global warming, focusing on Australia, Brazil, and the USA. Keeping warming below 2 °C significantly limits the increase in fire risk, but even at 1.5 °C, fire seasons lengthen, with more extreme conditions. However, low-fire weather periods remain, offering critical windows for fire management.
David A. Stappard, Jamie D. Wilson, Andrew Yool, and Toby Tyrrell
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-436, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-436, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This research explores nutrient limitations in oceanic primary production. While traditional experiments identify the immediate limiting nutrient at specific locations, this study aims to identify the ultimate limiting nutrient (ULN), which governs long-term productivity. A mathematical model incorporating nitrogen, phosphorus, and iron nutrient cycles is used. The model's results are compared with ocean observational data to assess its effectiveness in investigating the ULN.
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.
Bettina K. Gier, Manuel Schlund, Pierre Friedlingstein, Chris D. Jones, Colin Jones, Sönke Zaehle, and Veronika Eyring
Biogeosciences, 21, 5321–5360, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5321-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5321-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates present-day carbon cycle variables in CMIP5 and CMIP6 simulations. Overall, CMIP6 models perform better but also show many remaining biases. A significant improvement in the simulation of photosynthesis in models with a nitrogen cycle is found, with only small differences between emission- and concentration-based simulations. Thus, we recommend using emission-driven simulations in CMIP7 by default and including the nitrogen cycle in all future carbon cycle models.
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.
Andrew D. King, Tilo Ziehn, Matthew Chamberlain, Alexander R. Borowiak, Josephine R. Brown, Liam Cassidy, Andrea J. Dittus, Michael Grose, Nicola Maher, Seungmok Paik, Sarah E. Perkins-Kirkpatrick, and Aditya Sengupta
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1353–1383, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1353-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1353-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Governments are targeting net-zero emissions later this century with the aim of limiting global warming in line with the Paris Agreement. However, few studies explore the long-term consequences of reaching net-zero emissions and the effects of a delay in reaching net-zero. We use the Australian Earth system model to examine climate evolution under net-zero emissions. We find substantial changes which differ regionally, including continued Southern Ocean warming and Antarctic sea ice reduction.
Colin G. Jones, Fanny Adloff, Ben B. B. Booth, Peter M. Cox, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, Katja Frieler, Helene T. Hewitt, Hazel A. Jeffery, Sylvie Joussaume, Torben Koenigk, Bryan N. Lawrence, Eleanor O'Rourke, Malcolm J. Roberts, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Samuel Somot, Pier Luigi Vidale, Detlef van Vuuren, Mario Acosta, Mats Bentsen, Raffaele Bernardello, Richard Betts, Ed Blockley, Julien Boé, Tom Bracegirdle, Pascale Braconnot, Victor Brovkin, Carlo Buontempo, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Markus Donat, Italo Epicoco, Pete Falloon, Sandro Fiore, Thomas Frölicher, Neven S. Fučkar, Matthew J. Gidden, Helge F. Goessling, Rune Grand Graversen, Silvio Gualdi, José M. Gutiérrez, Tatiana Ilyina, Daniela Jacob, Chris D. Jones, Martin Juckes, Elizabeth Kendon, Erik Kjellström, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Michael Obersteiner, Pierre Regnier, Romain Roehrig, David Salas y Mélia, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Michael Schulz, Enrico Scoccimarro, Laurent Terray, Hannes Thiemann, Richard A. Wood, Shuting Yang, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1319–1351, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a number of priority areas for the international climate research community to address over the coming decade. Advances in these areas will both increase our understanding of past and future Earth system change, including the societal and environmental impacts of this change, and deliver significantly improved scientific support to international climate policy, such as future IPCC assessments and the UNFCCC Global Stocktake.
Jacqueline E. Russell, Richard J. Bantges, Helen E. Brindley, and Alejandro Bodas-Salcedo
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 4243–4266, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-4243-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-4243-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present a dataset of top-of-atmosphere diurnally resolved reflected solar and emitted thermal energy for Earth system model evaluation. The multi-year, monthly hourly dataset, derived from observations made by the Geostationary Earth Radiation Budget instrument, covers the range 60° N–60° S, 60° E–60° W at 1° resolution. Comparison with two versions of the Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model highlight how the data can be used to assess updates to key model parameterizations.
Ed Blockley, Emma Fiedler, Jeff Ridley, Luke Roberts, Alex West, Dan Copsey, Daniel Feltham, Tim Graham, David Livings, Clement Rousset, David Schroeder, and Martin Vancoppenolle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6799–6817, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6799-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6799-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper documents the sea ice model component of the latest Met Office coupled model configuration, which will be used as the physical basis for UK contributions to CMIP7. Documentation of science options used in the configuration are given along with a brief model evaluation. This is the first UK configuration to use NEMO’s new SI3 sea ice model. We provide details on how SI3 was adapted to work with Met Office coupling methodology and documentation of coupling processes in the model.
Matthew W. Jones, Douglas I. Kelley, Chantelle A. Burton, Francesca Di Giuseppe, Maria Lucia F. Barbosa, Esther Brambleby, Andrew J. Hartley, Anna Lombardi, Guilherme Mataveli, Joe R. McNorton, Fiona R. Spuler, Jakob B. Wessel, John T. Abatzoglou, Liana O. Anderson, Niels Andela, Sally Archibald, Dolors Armenteras, Eleanor Burke, Rachel Carmenta, Emilio Chuvieco, Hamish Clarke, Stefan H. Doerr, Paulo M. Fernandes, Louis Giglio, Douglas S. Hamilton, Stijn Hantson, Sarah Harris, Piyush Jain, Crystal A. Kolden, Tiina Kurvits, Seppe Lampe, Sarah Meier, Stacey New, Mark Parrington, Morgane M. G. Perron, Yuquan Qu, Natasha S. Ribeiro, Bambang H. Saharjo, Jesus San-Miguel-Ayanz, Jacquelyn K. Shuman, Veerachai Tanpipat, Guido R. van der Werf, Sander Veraverbeke, and Gavriil Xanthopoulos
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 3601–3685, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-3601-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-3601-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This inaugural State of Wildfires report catalogues extreme fires of the 2023–2024 fire season. For key events, we analyse their predictability and drivers and attribute them to climate change and land use. We provide a seasonal outlook and decadal projections. Key anomalies occurred in Canada, Greece, and western Amazonia, with other high-impact events catalogued worldwide. Climate change significantly increased the likelihood of extreme fires, and mitigation is required to lessen future risk.
Bethan L. Harris, Tristan Quaife, Christopher M. Taylor, and Phil P. Harris
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1019–1035, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1019-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1019-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The response of vegetation productivity to rainfall is a crucial process linking the water and carbon cycles and influencing the evolution of the climate system. However, there are many uncertainties in its representation in Earth system models. We show that the vegetation productivity responses to short-term rainfall events are very different between models due to their differing sensitivities to water availability. We also evaluate the models against a range of observational products.
Renata Moura da Veiga, Celso von Randow, Chantelle Burton, Douglas Kelley, Manoel Cardoso, and Fabiano Morelli
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2348, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2348, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We systematically reviewed 69 papers on fire emissions from the Brazilian Cerrado biome to provide insights into its placement in the atmospheric carbon budget and support future improved estimation. We find that estimating fire emissions in the Cerrado requires a comprehensive approach, combining quantitative and qualitative aspects of fire. A pathway towards this is the inclusion of fire management representation in land surface models and the integration of observational and modelling data.
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
Short summary
Effective radiative forcing (ERF) is a metric for estimating how human activities and natural agents change the energy flow into and out of the Earth’s climate system. We investigate the anthropogenic aerosol ERF, and we estimate the contribution of individual processes to the total ERF using simulations from Earth system models within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). Our findings highlight that aerosol–cloud interactions drive ERF variability during the last 150 years.
Douglas McNeall, Eddy Robertson, and Andy Wiltshire
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1059–1089, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1059-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1059-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We can run simulations of the land surface and carbon cycle, using computer models to help us understand and predict climate change and its impacts. These simulations are not perfect reproductions of the real land surface, and that can make them less effective tools. We use new statistical and computational techniques to help us understand how different our models are from the real land surface, how to make them more realistic, and how well we can simulate past and future climate.
Yusuf A. Bhatti, Laura E. Revell, Alex J. Schuddeboom, Adrian J. McDonald, Alex T. Archibald, Jonny Williams, Abhijith U. Venugopal, Catherine Hardacre, and Erik Behrens
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 15181–15196, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-15181-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-15181-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosols are a large source of uncertainty over the Southern Ocean. A dominant source of sulfate aerosol in this region is dimethyl sulfide (DMS), which is poorly simulated by climate models. We show the sensitivity of simulated atmospheric DMS to the choice of oceanic DMS data set and emission scheme. We show that oceanic DMS has twice the influence on atmospheric DMS than the emission scheme. Simulating DMS more accurately in climate models will help to constrain aerosol uncertainty.
Lee de Mora, Ranjini Swaminathan, Richard P. Allan, Jerry C. Blackford, Douglas I. Kelley, Phil Harris, Chris D. Jones, Colin G. Jones, Spencer Liddicoat, Robert J. Parker, Tristan Quaife, Jeremy Walton, and Andrew Yool
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 1295–1315, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1295-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1295-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the flux of carbon from the atmosphere into the land surface and ocean for multiple models and over a range of future scenarios. We did this by comparing simulations after the same change in the global-mean near-surface temperature. Using this method, we show that the choice of scenario can impact the carbon allocation to the land, ocean, and atmosphere. Scenarios with higher emissions reach the same warming levels sooner, but also with relatively more carbon in the atmosphere.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Peter Landschützer, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Leticia Barbero, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Bertrand Decharme, Laurent Bopp, Ida Bagus Mandhara Brasika, Patricia Cadule, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Naveen Chandra, Thi-Tuyet-Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Xinyu Dou, Kazutaka Enyo, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Daniel J. Ford, Thomas Gasser, Josefine Ghattas, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Jens Heinke, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Andrew R. Jacobson, Atul Jain, Tereza Jarníková, Annika Jersild, Fei Jiang, Zhe Jin, Fortunat Joos, Etsushi Kato, Ralph F. Keeling, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Xin Lan, Nathalie Lefèvre, Hongmei Li, Junjie Liu, Zhiqiang Liu, Lei Ma, Greg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Patrick C. McGuire, Galen A. McKinley, Gesa Meyer, Eric J. Morgan, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin M. O'Brien, Are Olsen, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Melf Paulsen, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Carter M. Powis, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, T. Luke Smallman, Stephen M. Smith, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Erik van Ooijen, Rik Wanninkhof, Michio Watanabe, Cathy Wimart-Rousseau, Dongxu Yang, Xiaojuan Yang, Wenping Yuan, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5301–5369, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5301-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2023 describes the methodology, main results, and data sets used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, land ecosystems, and the ocean over the historical period (1750–2023). These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Joao Carlos Martins Teixeira, Chantelle Burton, Douglas I. Kelly, Gerd A. Folberth, Fiona M. O'Connor, Richard A. Betts, and Apostolos Voulgarakis
Biogeosciences Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2023-136, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2023-136, 2023
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
Representing socio-economic impacts on fires is crucial to underpin the confidence in global fire models. Introducing these into INFERNO, reduces biases and improves the modelled burnt area (BA) trends when compared to observations. Including socio-economic factors in the representation of fires in Earth System Models is important for realistically simulating BA, quantifying trends in the recent past, and for understanding the main drivers of those at regional scales.
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.
Laura J. Wilcox, Robert J. Allen, Bjørn H. Samset, Massimo A. Bollasina, Paul T. Griffiths, James Keeble, Marianne T. Lund, Risto Makkonen, Joonas Merikanto, Declan O'Donnell, David J. Paynter, Geeta G. Persad, Steven T. Rumbold, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Sabine Undorf, and Daniel M. Westervelt
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 4451–4479, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4451-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4451-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Changes in anthropogenic aerosol emissions have strongly contributed to global and regional climate change. However, the size of these regional impacts and the way they arise are still uncertain. With large changes in aerosol emissions a possibility over the next few decades, it is important to better quantify the potential role of aerosol in future regional climate change. The Regional Aerosol Model Intercomparison Project will deliver experiments designed to facilitate this.
Camilla Mathison, Eleanor Burke, Andrew J. Hartley, Douglas I. Kelley, Chantelle Burton, Eddy Robertson, Nicola Gedney, Karina Williams, Andy Wiltshire, Richard J. Ellis, Alistair A. Sellar, and Chris D. Jones
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 4249–4264, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4249-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4249-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes and evaluates a new modelling methodology to quantify the impacts of climate change on water, biomes and the carbon cycle. We have created a new configuration and set-up for the JULES-ES land surface model, driven by bias-corrected historical and future climate model output provided by the Inter-Sectoral Impacts Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP). This allows us to compare projections of the impacts of climate change across multiple impact models and multiple sectors.
George Manville, Thomas G. Bell, Jane P. Mulcahy, Rafel Simó, Martí Galí, Anoop S. Mahajan, Shrivardhan Hulswar, and Paul R. Halloran
Biogeosciences, 20, 1813–1828, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1813-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1813-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present the first global investigation of controls on seawater dimethylsulfide (DMS) spatial variability over scales of up to 100 km. Sea surface height anomalies, density, and chlorophyll a help explain almost 80 % of DMS variability. The results suggest that physical and biogeochemical processes play an equally important role in controlling DMS variability. These data provide independent confirmation that existing parameterisations of seawater DMS concentration use appropriate variables.
Edward Gryspeerdt, Adam C. Povey, Roy G. Grainger, Otto Hasekamp, N. Christina Hsu, Jane P. Mulcahy, Andrew M. Sayer, and Armin Sorooshian
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 4115–4122, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4115-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4115-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The impact of aerosols on clouds is one of the largest uncertainties in the human forcing of the climate. Aerosol can increase the concentrations of droplets in clouds, but observational and model studies produce widely varying estimates of this effect. We show that these estimates can be reconciled if only polluted clouds are studied, but this is insufficient to constrain the climate impact of aerosol. The uncertainty in aerosol impact on clouds is currently driven by cases with little aerosol.
Alban Planchat, Lester Kwiatkowski, Laurent Bopp, Olivier Torres, James R. Christian, Momme Butenschön, Tomas Lovato, Roland Séférian, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Olivier Aumont, Michio Watanabe, Akitomo Yamamoto, Andrew Yool, Tatiana Ilyina, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Kristen M. Krumhardt, Jörg Schwinger, Jerry Tjiputra, John P. Dunne, and Charles Stock
Biogeosciences, 20, 1195–1257, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1195-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1195-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Ocean alkalinity is critical to the uptake of atmospheric carbon and acidification in surface waters. We review the representation of alkalinity and the associated calcium carbonate cycle in Earth system models. While many parameterizations remain present in the latest generation of models, there is a general improvement in the simulated alkalinity distribution. This improvement is related to an increase in the export of biotic calcium carbonate, which closer resembles observations.
Jeff Polton, James Harle, Jason Holt, Anna Katavouta, Dale Partridge, Jenny Jardine, Sarah Wakelin, Julia Rulent, Anthony Wise, Katherine Hutchinson, David Byrne, Diego Bruciaferri, Enda O'Dea, Michela De Dominicis, Pierre Mathiot, Andrew Coward, Andrew Yool, Julien Palmiéri, Gennadi Lessin, Claudia Gabriela Mayorga-Adame, Valérie Le Guennec, Alex Arnold, and Clément Rousset
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1481–1510, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1481-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1481-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The aim is to increase the capacity of the modelling community to respond to societally important questions that require ocean modelling. The concept of reproducibility for regional ocean modelling is developed: advocating methods for reproducible workflows and standardised methods of assessment. Then, targeting the NEMO framework, we give practical advice and worked examples, highlighting key considerations that will the expedite development cycle and upskill the user community.
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.
Stephanie Woodward, Alistair A. Sellar, Yongming Tang, Marc Stringer, Andrew Yool, Eddy Robertson, and Andy Wiltshire
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 14503–14528, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-14503-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-14503-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We describe the dust scheme in the UKESM1 Earth system model and show generally good agreement with observations. Comparing with the closely related HadGEM3-GC3.1 model, we show that dust differences are not only due to inter-model differences but also to the dust size distribution. Under climate change, HadGEM3-GC3.1 dust hardly changes, but UKESM1 dust decreases because that model includes the vegetation response which, in our models, has a bigger impact on dust than climate change itself.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Michael O'Sullivan, Matthew W. Jones, Robbie M. Andrew, Luke Gregor, Judith Hauck, Corinne Le Quéré, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Are Olsen, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Clemens Schwingshackl, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Robert B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Ramdane Alkama, Almut Arneth, Vivek K. Arora, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Henry C. Bittig, Laurent Bopp, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Wiley Evans, Stefanie Falk, Richard A. Feely, Thomas Gasser, Marion Gehlen, Thanos Gkritzalis, Lucas Gloege, Giacomo Grassi, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Matthew Hefner, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Atul K. Jain, Annika Jersild, Koji Kadono, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Peter Landschützer, Nathalie Lefèvre, Keith Lindsay, Junjie Liu, Zhu Liu, Gregg Marland, Nicolas Mayot, Matthew J. McGrath, Nicolas Metzl, Natalie M. Monacci, David R. Munro, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Kevin O'Brien, Tsuneo Ono, Paul I. Palmer, Naiqing Pan, Denis Pierrot, Katie Pocock, Benjamin Poulter, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Carmen Rodriguez, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Jamie D. Shutler, Ingunn Skjelvan, Tobias Steinhoff, Qing Sun, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Shintaro Takao, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Xiangjun Tian, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Anthony P. Walker, Rik Wanninkhof, Chris Whitehead, Anna Willstrand Wranne, Rebecca Wright, Wenping Yuan, Chao Yue, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, Jiye Zeng, and Bo Zheng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 4811–4900, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4811-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2022 describes the datasets and methodology used to quantify the anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and their partitioning among the atmosphere, the land ecosystems, and the ocean. These living datasets are updated every year to provide the highest transparency and traceability in the reporting of CO2, the key driver of climate change.
Alex West, Edward Blockley, and Matthew Collins
The Cryosphere, 16, 4013–4032, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4013-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4013-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we explore a method of examining model differences in ice volume by looking at the seasonal ice growth and melt. We use simple physical relationships to judge how model differences in key variables affect ice growth and melt and apply these to three case study models with ice volume ranging from very thin to very thick. Results suggest that differences in snow and melt pond cover in early summer are most important in causing the sea ice differences for these models.
Antony Siahaan, Robin S. Smith, Paul R. Holland, Adrian Jenkins, Jonathan M. Gregory, Victoria Lee, Pierre Mathiot, Antony J. Payne, Jeff K. Ridley, and Colin G. Jones
The Cryosphere, 16, 4053–4086, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4053-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4053-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The UK Earth System Model is the first to fully include interactions of the atmosphere and ocean with the Antarctic Ice Sheet. Under the low-greenhouse-gas SSP1–1.9 (Shared Socioeconomic Pathway) scenario, the ice sheet remains stable over the 21st century. Under the strong-greenhouse-gas SSP5–8.5 scenario, the model predicts strong increases in melting of large ice shelves and snow accumulation on the surface. The dominance of accumulation leads to a sea level fall at the end of the century.
Ville Leinonen, Harri Kokkola, Taina Yli-Juuti, Tero Mielonen, Thomas Kühn, Tuomo Nieminen, Simo Heikkinen, Tuuli Miinalainen, Tommi Bergman, Ken Carslaw, Stefano Decesari, Markus Fiebig, Tareq Hussein, Niku Kivekäs, Radovan Krejci, Markku Kulmala, Ari Leskinen, Andreas Massling, Nikos Mihalopoulos, Jane P. Mulcahy, Steffen M. Noe, Twan van Noije, Fiona M. O'Connor, Colin O'Dowd, Dirk Olivie, Jakob B. Pernov, Tuukka Petäjä, Øyvind Seland, Michael Schulz, Catherine E. Scott, Henrik Skov, Erik Swietlicki, Thomas Tuch, Alfred Wiedensohler, Annele Virtanen, and Santtu Mikkonen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12873–12905, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12873-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12873-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We provide the first extensive comparison of detailed aerosol size distribution trends between in situ observations from Europe and five different earth system models. We investigated aerosol modes (nucleation, Aitken, and accumulation) separately and were able to show the differences between measured and modeled trends and especially their seasonal patterns. The differences in model results are likely due to complex effects of several processes instead of certain specific model features.
Pradeebane Vaittinada Ayar, Laurent Bopp, Jim R. Christian, Tatiana Ilyina, John P. Krasting, Roland Séférian, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Michio Watanabe, Andrew Yool, and Jerry Tjiputra
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1097–1118, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1097-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1097-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The El Niño–Southern Oscillation is the main driver for the natural variability of global atmospheric CO2. It modulates the CO2 fluxes in the tropical Pacific with anomalous CO2 influx during El Niño and outflux during La Niña. This relationship is projected to reverse by half of Earth system models studied here under the business-as-usual scenario. This study shows models that simulate a positive bias in surface carbonate concentrations simulate a shift in the ENSO–CO2 flux relationship.
Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew W. Jones, Michael O'Sullivan, Robbie M. Andrew, Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Judith Hauck, Corinne Le Quéré, Glen P. Peters, Wouter Peters, Julia Pongratz, Stephen Sitch, Josep G. Canadell, Philippe Ciais, Rob B. Jackson, Simone R. Alin, Peter Anthoni, Nicholas R. Bates, Meike Becker, Nicolas Bellouin, Laurent Bopp, Thi Tuyet Trang Chau, Frédéric Chevallier, Louise P. Chini, Margot Cronin, Kim I. Currie, Bertrand Decharme, Laique M. Djeutchouang, Xinyu Dou, Wiley Evans, Richard A. Feely, Liang Feng, Thomas Gasser, Dennis Gilfillan, Thanos Gkritzalis, Giacomo Grassi, Luke Gregor, Nicolas Gruber, Özgür Gürses, Ian Harris, Richard A. Houghton, George C. Hurtt, Yosuke Iida, Tatiana Ilyina, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Atul Jain, Steve D. Jones, Etsushi Kato, Daniel Kennedy, Kees Klein Goldewijk, Jürgen Knauer, Jan Ivar Korsbakken, Arne Körtzinger, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Sebastian Lienert, Junjie Liu, Gregg Marland, Patrick C. McGuire, Joe R. Melton, David R. Munro, Julia E. M. S. Nabel, Shin-Ichiro Nakaoka, Yosuke Niwa, Tsuneo Ono, Denis Pierrot, Benjamin Poulter, Gregor Rehder, Laure Resplandy, Eddy Robertson, Christian Rödenbeck, Thais M. Rosan, Jörg Schwinger, Clemens Schwingshackl, Roland Séférian, Adrienne J. Sutton, Colm Sweeney, Toste Tanhua, Pieter P. Tans, Hanqin Tian, Bronte Tilbrook, Francesco Tubiello, Guido R. van der Werf, Nicolas Vuichard, Chisato Wada, Rik Wanninkhof, Andrew J. Watson, David Willis, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Wenping Yuan, Chao Yue, Xu Yue, Sönke Zaehle, and Jiye Zeng
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 1917–2005, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Carbon Budget 2021 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.
Reint Fischer, Delphine Lobelle, Merel Kooi, Albert Koelmans, Victor Onink, Charlotte Laufkötter, Linda Amaral-Zettler, Andrew Yool, and Erik van Sebille
Biogeosciences, 19, 2211–2234, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2211-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2211-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Since current estimates show that only about 1 % of the all plastic that enters the ocean is floating at the surface, we look at subsurface processes that can cause vertical movement of (micro)plastic. We investigate how modelled algal attachment and the ocean's vertical movement can cause particles to sink and oscillate in the open ocean. Particles can sink to depths of > 5000 m in regions with high wind intensity and mainly remain close to the surface with low winds and biological activity.
Rahayu Adzhar, Douglas I. Kelley, Ning Dong, Charles George, Mireia Torello Raventos, Elmar Veenendaal, Ted R. Feldpausch, Oliver L. Phillips, Simon L. Lewis, Bonaventure Sonké, Herman Taedoumg, Beatriz Schwantes Marimon, Tomas Domingues, Luzmila Arroyo, Gloria Djagbletey, Gustavo Saiz, and France Gerard
Biogeosciences, 19, 1377–1394, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-1377-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-1377-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The MODIS Vegetation Continuous Fields (VCF) product underestimates tree cover compared to field data and could be underestimating tree cover significantly across the tropics. VCF is used to represent land cover or validate model performance in many land surface and global vegetation models and to train finer-scaled Earth observation products. Because underestimation in VCF may render it unsuitable for training data and bias model predictions, it should be calibrated before use in the tropics.
Emma K. Fiedler, Matthew J. Martin, Ed Blockley, Davi Mignac, Nicolas Fournier, Andy Ridout, Andrew Shepherd, and Rachel Tilling
The Cryosphere, 16, 61–85, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-61-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-61-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Sea ice thickness (SIT) observations derived from CryoSat-2 satellite measurements have been successfully used to initialise an ocean and sea ice forecasting model (FOAM). Other centres have previously used gridded and averaged SIT observations for this purpose, but we demonstrate here for the first time that SIT measurements along the satellite orbit track can be used. Validation of the resulting modelled SIT demonstrates improvements in the model performance compared to a control.
Jie Zhang, Kalli Furtado, Steven T. Turnock, Jane P. Mulcahy, Laura J. Wilcox, Ben B. Booth, David Sexton, Tongwen Wu, Fang Zhang, and Qianxia Liu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 18609–18627, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18609-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18609-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The CMIP6 ESMs systematically underestimate TAS anomalies in the NH midlatitudes, especially from 1960 to 1990. The anomalous cooling is concurrent in time and space with anthropogenic SO2 emissions. The spurious drop in TAS is attributed to the overestimated aerosol concentrations. The aerosol forcing sensitivity cannot well explain the inter-model spread of PHC biases. And the cloud-amount term accounts for most of the inter-model spread in aerosol forcing sensitivity.
Catherine Hardacre, Jane P. Mulcahy, Richard J. Pope, Colin G. Jones, Steven T. Rumbold, Can Li, Colin Johnson, and Steven T. Turnock
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 18465–18497, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18465-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18465-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate UKESM1's ability to represent the sulfur (S) cycle in the recent historical period. The S cycle is a key driver of historical radiative forcing. Earth system models such as UKESM1 should represent the S cycle well so that we can have confidence in their projections of future climate. We compare UKESM1 to observations of sulfur compounds, finding that the model generally performs well. We also identify areas for UKESM1’s development, focussing on how SO2 is removed from the air.
Anthony C. Jones, Adrian Hill, Samuel Remy, N. Luke Abraham, Mohit Dalvi, Catherine Hardacre, Alan J. Hewitt, Ben Johnson, Jane P. Mulcahy, and Steven T. Turnock
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 15901–15927, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15901-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-15901-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Ammonium nitrate is hard to model because it forms and evaporates rapidly. One approach is to relate its equilibrium concentration to temperature, humidity, and the amount of nitric acid and ammonia gases. Using this approach, we limit the rate at which equilibrium is reached using various condensation rates in a climate model. We show that ammonium nitrate concentrations are highly sensitive to the condensation rate. Our results will help improve the representation of nitrate in climate models.
Tao Tang, Drew Shindell, Yuqiang Zhang, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Gunnar Myhre, Gregory Faluvegi, Bjørn H. Samset, Timothy Andrews, Dirk Olivié, Toshihiko Takemura, and Xuhui Lee
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 13797–13809, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-13797-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-13797-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Previous studies showed that black carbon (BC) could warm the surface with decreased incoming radiation. With climate models, we found that the surface energy redistribution plays a more crucial role in surface temperature compared with other forcing agents. Though BC could reduce the surface heating, the energy dissipates less efficiently, which is manifested by reduced convective and evaporative cooling, thereby warming the surface.
Josué Bock, Martine Michou, Pierre Nabat, Manabu Abe, Jane P. Mulcahy, Dirk J. L. Olivié, Jörg Schwinger, Parvadha Suntharalingam, Jerry Tjiputra, Marco van Hulten, Michio Watanabe, Andrew Yool, and Roland Séférian
Biogeosciences, 18, 3823–3860, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3823-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-3823-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we analyse surface ocean dimethylsulfide (DMS) concentration and flux to the atmosphere from four CMIP6 Earth system models over the historical and ssp585 simulations.
Our analysis of contemporary (1980–2009) climatologies shows that models better reproduce observations in mid to high latitudes. The models disagree on the sign of the trend of the global DMS flux from 1980 onwards. The models agree on a positive trend of DMS over polar latitudes following sea-ice retreat dynamics.
Andrew Yool, Julien Palmiéri, Colin G. Jones, Lee de Mora, Till Kuhlbrodt, Ekatarina E. Popova, A. J. George Nurser, Joel Hirschi, Adam T. Blaker, Andrew C. Coward, Edward W. Blockley, and Alistair A. Sellar
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3437–3472, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3437-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3437-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The ocean plays a key role in modulating the Earth’s climate. Understanding this role is critical when using models to project future climate change. Consequently, it is necessary to evaluate their realism against the ocean's observed state. Here we validate UKESM1, a new Earth system model, focusing on the realism of its ocean physics and circulation, as well as its biological cycles and productivity. While we identify biases, generally the model performs well over a wide range of properties.
Ann Keen, Ed Blockley, David A. Bailey, Jens Boldingh Debernard, Mitchell Bushuk, Steve Delhaye, David Docquier, Daniel Feltham, François Massonnet, Siobhan O'Farrell, Leandro Ponsoni, José M. Rodriguez, David Schroeder, Neil Swart, Takahiro Toyoda, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Martin Vancoppenolle, and Klaus Wyser
The Cryosphere, 15, 951–982, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-951-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-951-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We compare the mass budget of the Arctic sea ice in a number of the latest climate models. New output has been defined that allows us to compare the processes of sea ice growth and loss in a more detailed way than has previously been possible. We find that that the models are strikingly similar in terms of the major processes causing the annual growth and loss of Arctic sea ice and that the budget terms respond in a broadly consistent way as the climate warms during the 21st century.
Douglas I. Kelley, Chantelle Burton, Chris Huntingford, Megan A. J. Brown, Rhys Whitley, and Ning Dong
Biogeosciences, 18, 787–804, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-787-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-787-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Initial evidence suggests human ignitions or landscape changes caused most Amazon fires during August 2019. However, confirmation is needed that meteorological conditions did not have a substantial role. Assessing the influence of historical weather on burning in an uncertainty framework, we find that 2019 meteorological conditions alone should have resulted in much less fire than observed. We conclude socio-economic factors likely had a strong role in the high recorded 2019 fire activity.
Fiona M. O'Connor, N. Luke Abraham, Mohit Dalvi, Gerd A. Folberth, Paul T. Griffiths, Catherine Hardacre, Ben T. Johnson, Ron Kahana, James Keeble, Byeonghyeon Kim, Olaf Morgenstern, Jane P. Mulcahy, Mark Richardson, Eddy Robertson, Jeongbyn Seo, Sungbo Shim, João C. Teixeira, Steven T. Turnock, Jonny Williams, Andrew J. Wiltshire, Stephanie Woodward, and Guang Zeng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1211–1243, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1211-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1211-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper calculates how changes in emissions and/or concentrations of different atmospheric constituents since the pre-industrial era have altered the Earth's energy budget at the present day using a metric called effective radiative forcing. The impact of land use change is also assessed. We find that individual contributions do not add linearly, and different Earth system interactions can affect the magnitude of the calculated effective radiative forcing.
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.
Jane P. Mulcahy, Colin Johnson, Colin G. Jones, Adam C. Povey, Catherine E. Scott, Alistair Sellar, Steven T. Turnock, Matthew T. Woodhouse, Nathan Luke Abraham, Martin B. Andrews, Nicolas Bellouin, Jo Browse, Ken S. Carslaw, Mohit Dalvi, Gerd A. Folberth, Matthew Glover, Daniel P. Grosvenor, Catherine Hardacre, Richard Hill, Ben Johnson, Andy Jones, Zak Kipling, Graham Mann, James Mollard, Fiona M. O'Connor, Julien Palmiéri, Carly Reddington, Steven T. Rumbold, Mark Richardson, Nick A. J. Schutgens, Philip Stier, Marc Stringer, Yongming Tang, Jeremy Walton, Stephanie Woodward, and Andrew Yool
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 6383–6423, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6383-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6383-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosols are an important component of the Earth system. Here, we comprehensively document and evaluate the aerosol schemes as implemented in the physical and Earth system models, HadGEM3-GC3.1 and UKESM1. This study provides a useful characterisation of the aerosol climatology in both models, facilitating the understanding of the numerous aerosol–climate interaction studies that will be conducted for CMIP6 and beyond.
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.
Jonathan K. P. Shonk, Andrew G. Turner, Amulya Chevuturi, Laura J. Wilcox, Andrea J. Dittus, and Ed Hawkins
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 14903–14915, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14903-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14903-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We use a set of model simulations of the 20th century to demonstrate that the uncertainty in the cooling effect of man-made aerosol emissions has a wide range of impacts on global monsoons. For the weakest cooling, the impact of aerosol is overpowered by greenhouse gas (GHG) warming and monsoon rainfall increases in the late 20th century. For the strongest cooling, aerosol impact dominates over GHG warming, leading to reduced monsoon rainfall, particularly from 1950 to 1980.
Alex West, Mat Collins, and Ed Blockley
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4845–4868, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4845-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4845-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This study calculates sea ice energy fluxes from data produced by ice mass balance buoys (devices measuring ice elevation and temperature). It is shown how the resulting dataset can be used to evaluate a coupled climate model (HadGEM2-ES), with biases in the energy fluxes seen to be consistent with biases in the sea ice state and surface radiation. This method has potential to improve sea ice model evaluation, so as to better understand spread in model simulations of sea ice state.
Lee de Mora, Alistair A. Sellar, Andrew Yool, Julien Palmieri, Robin S. Smith, Till Kuhlbrodt, Robert J. Parker, Jeremy Walton, Jeremy C. Blackford, and Colin G. Jones
Geosci. Commun., 3, 263–278, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-263-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-3-263-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We use time series data from the first United Kingdom Earth System Model (UKESM1) to create six procedurally generated musical pieces for piano. Each of the six pieces help to explain either a scientific principle or a practical aspect of Earth system modelling. We describe the methods that were used to create these pieces, discuss the limitations of this pilot study and list several approaches to extend and expand upon this work.
Cited articles
Aas, W., Mortier, A., Bowersox, V., Cherian, R., Faluvegi, G., Fagerli, H.,
Hand, J., Klimont, Z., Galy-Lacaux, C., Lehmann, C. M. B., Myhre, C. L.,
Myhre, G., Olivié, D., Sato, K., Quaas, J., Rao, P. S. P., Schulz, M.,
Shindell, D., Skeie, R. B., Stein, A., Takemura, T., Tsyro, S., Vet, R., and
Xu, X.: Global and regional trends of atmospheric sulfur, Sci. Rep.-UK,
9, 953, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-37304-0, 2019. a
AERONET: Ground-based AOD data from AERONET, AERONET [data set], https://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov/, last access: 9 February 2022. a
Andrews, M. B., Ridley, J. K., Wood, R. A., Andrews, T., Blockley, E. W.,
Booth, B., Burke, E., Dittus, A. J., Florek, P., Gray, L. J., Haddad, S.,
Hardiman, S. C., Hermanson, L., Hodson, D., Hogan, E., Jones, G. S., Knight,
J. R., Kuhlbrodt, T., Misios, S., Mizielinski, M. S., Ringer, M. A., Robson,
J., and Sutton, R. T.: Historical Simulations With HadGEM3-GC3.1 for CMIP6,
J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001995,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001995, 2020. a
Andrews, T., Andrews, M. B., Bodas-Salcedo, A., Jones, G. S., Kuhlbrodt, T.,
Manners, J., Menary, M. B., Ridley, J., Ringer, M. A., Sellar, A. A., Senior,
C. A., and Tang, Y.: Forcings, Feedbacks, and Climate Sensitivity in
HadGEM3-GC3.1 and UKESM1, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11,
4377–4394, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001866, 2019. a, b, c, d, e, f, g
Archibald, A. T., O'Connor, F. M., Abraham, N. L., Archer-Nicholls, S., Chipperfield, M. P., Dalvi, M., Folberth, G. A., Dennison, F., Dhomse, S. S., Griffiths, P. T., Hardacre, C., Hewitt, A. J., Hill, R. S., Johnson, C. E., Keeble, J., Köhler, M. O., Morgenstern, O., Mulcahy, J. P., Ordóñez, C., Pope, R. J., Rumbold, S. T., Russo, M. R., Savage, N. H., Sellar, A., Stringer, M., Turnock, S. T., Wild, O., and Zeng, G.: Description and evaluation of the UKCA stratosphere–troposphere chemistry scheme (StratTrop vn 1.0) implemented in UKESM1, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1223–1266, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1223-2020, 2020. a, b
Bennartz, R. and
Rausch, J.: Cloud Droplet Number Concentration Climatology, Vanderbilt University [data set], https://doi.org/10.15695/vudata.ees.1, 2016. a
Bennartz, R. and Rausch, J.: Global and regional estimates of warm cloud droplet number concentration based on 13 years of AQUA-MODIS observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 9815–9836, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-9815-2017, 2017. a, b
Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Clark, D. B., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Ménard, C. B., Edwards, J. M., Hendry, M. A., Porson, A., Gedney, N., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Cox, P. M., Grimmond, C. S. B., and Harding, R. J.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 677–699, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-677-2011, 2011. a
Bevan, S. L., North, P. R., Los, S. O., and Grey, W. M.: A global dataset of
atmospheric aerosol optical depth and surface reflectance from AATSR,
Remote Sens. Environ., 116, 199–210,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.05.024, 2012. a
Bodas-Salcedo, A., Mulcahy, J. P., Andrews, T., Williams, K. D., Ringer, M. A.,
Field, P. R., and Elsaesser, G. S.: Strong Dependence of Atmospheric
Feedbacks on Mixed-Phase Microphysics and Aerosol-Cloud Interactions in
HadGEM3, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 1735–1758,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001688, 2019. a
Boyer, T., Domingues, C. M., Good, S. A., Johnson, G. C., Lyman, J. M., Ishii,
M., Gouretski, V., Willis, J. K., Antonov, J., Wijffels, S., Church, J. A.,
Cowley, R., and Bindoff, N. L.: Sensitivity of global upper-ocean heat
content estimates to mapping methods, XBT bias corrections, and baseline
climatologies, J. Climate, 29, 4817–4842,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0801.1, 2016. a
Carslaw, K. S., Lee, L. A., Reddington, C. L., Pringle, K. J., Rap, A.,
Forster, P. M., Mann, G. W., Spracklen, D. V., Woodhouse, M. T., Regayre,
L. A., and Pierce, J. R.: Large contribution of natural aerosols to
uncertainty in indirect forcing, Nature, 503, 67, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12674,
2013. a, b
Checa-Garcia, R., Balkanski, Y., Albani, S., Bergman, T., Carslaw, K., Cozic, A., Dearden, C., Marticorena, B., Michou, M., van Noije, T., Nabat, P., O'Connor, F. M., Olivié, D., Prospero, J. M., Le Sager, P., Schulz, M., and Scott, C.: Evaluation of natural aerosols in CRESCENDO Earth system models (ESMs): mineral dust, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10295–10335, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10295-2021, 2021. a, b
Cheng, L., Trenberth, K. E., Fasullo, J., Boyer, T., Abraham, J., and Zhu, J.:
Improved estimates of ocean heat content from 1960 to 2015, Sci.
Adv., 3, 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1601545, 2017. a
Cheng, L., Abraham, J., Zhu, J., Trenberth, K. E., Fasullo, J., Boyer, T.,
Locarnini, R., Zhang, B., Yu, F., Wan, L., Chen, X., Song, X., Liu, Y., and
Mann, M. E.: Record-Setting Ocean Warmth Continued in 2019, Adv.
Atmos. Sci., 37, 137–142, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-020-9283-7, 2020. a
Clark, D. B., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Jones, C. D., Gedney, N., Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Harding, R. J., Huntingford, C., and Cox, P. M.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 2: Carbon fluxes and vegetation dynamics, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 701–722, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-701-2011, 2011. a
Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET): Aggregate concentration data for weekly sulphur dioxide and weekly sulphate; Historical deposition data for weekly dry deposition of sulphur dioxide and weekly dry deposition of sulphate, CASTNET [data set], http://www.epa.gov/castnet, last access: 11 February 2022. a
Coleman, K. and Jenkinson, D. S.: RothC-26.3: a model for the turnover of
carbon in soil. Model description and Users guide, Technical Note, Lawes
Agricultural Trust, Harpenden, United Kingdom, 1999. a
Cowtan, K. and Way, R. G.: Coverage bias in the HadCRUT4 temperature series
and its impact on recent temperature trends, Q. J. Roy.
Meteorol. Soc., 140, 1935–1944,
https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2297, 2014. a, b
Cox, P. M.: Description of the “TRIFFID” dynamic global vegetation model,
Hadley Centre Technical Note, Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, Devon, United
Kingdom, 2001. a
Dittus, A. J., Hawkins, E., Wilcox, L. J., Sutton, R. T., Smith, C. J.,
Andrews, M. B., and Forster, P. M.: Sensitivity of Historical Climate
Simulations to Uncertain Aerosol Forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47,
e2019GL085806, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085806, 2020. a
Dittus, A. J., Hawkins, E., Robson, J. I., Smith, D. M., and Wilcox, L. J.:
Drivers of Recent North Pacific Decadal Variability: The Role of Aerosol
Forcing, Earth's Future, 9, e2021EF002249,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EF002249, 2021. a
Domingues, C. M., Church, J. A., White, N. J., Gleckler, P. J., Wijffels,
S. E., Barker, P. M., and Dunn, J. R.: Improved estimates of upper-ocean
warming and multi-decadal sea-level rise, Nature, 453, 1090–1093,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07080, 2008. a
Donohue, K. A., Tracey, K. L., Watts, D. R., Chidichimo, M. P., and Chereskin, T. K.: Mean Antarctic Circumpolar Current transport measured in Drake Passage, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 11760–11767, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070319, 2016. a
Durack, P. J. and Taylor, K. E.: PCMDI AMIP SST and sea-ice boundary
conditions version 1.1.3, WCRP [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/input4MIPs.1735, 2017. a
Erisman, J. W. and Baldocchi, D.: Modelling dry deposition of SO2, Tellus B, 46, 159–171,
https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v46i3.15789, 1994. a
Erisman, J. W., Van Pul, A., and Wyers, P.: Parametrization of surface
resistance for the quantification of atmospheric deposition of acidifying
pollutants and ozone, Atmos. Environ., 28, 2595–2607,
https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(94)90433-2, 1994. a, b
ESA Aerosols CCI project team, de Leeuw, G., and Popp, T.: ESA Aerosol Climate Change Initiative (Aerosol_cci): Level 2 aerosol products from AATSR (SU Algorithm), Version 4.3, Centre for Environmental Data Analysis, https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/b03b3887ad2f4d5481e7a39344239ab2 (last access: March 2023),
2020a. a
ESA Aerosols CCI project team, de Leeuw, G., and Popp, T.: ESA Aerosol Climate Change Initiative (Aerosol_cci): Level 2 aerosol products from AATSR (ORAC Algorithm), Version 4.01, Centre for Environmental Data Analysis, https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/8b63d36f6f1e4efa8aea302b924bc46b (last access: March 2023), 2020b. a
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016. a, b
Fetterer, F., Knowles, K., Meier, W. N., Savoie, M., and Windnagel, A. K.: Sea
Ice Index, Version 3, 1980–2014, https://doi.org/10.7265/N5K072F8
(last access: 10 August 2021), 2017. a
Flynn, C. M. and Mauritsen, T.: On the climate sensitivity and historical warming evolution in recent coupled model ensembles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 7829–7842, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-7829-2020, 2020. a, b
Forget, G., Campin, J.-M., Heimbach, P., Hill, C. N., Ponte, R. M., and Wunsch, C.: ECCO version 4: an integrated framework for non-linear inverse modeling and global ocean state estimation, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3071–3104, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3071-2015, 2015. a
Forster, P., Storelvmo, T., Armour, K., Collins, W., Dufresne, J.-L., Frame, D., Lunt, D. J., Mauritsen, T., Palmer, M. D., Watanabe, M., Wild, M., and Zhang, H.: The Earth's Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks, and Climate Sensitivity, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 923–1054, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.009, 2021. a
Fukumori, I., Wang, O., Fenty, I., Forget, G., Heimbach, P., and Ponte, R. M.:
Synopsis of the ECCO Central Production Global Ocean and Sea-Ice State
Estimate (Version 4 Release 4), Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4533349, 2021. a
Garcia, H. E., Locarnini, R. A., Boyer, T. P., Antonov, J. I., Baranova, O. K.,
Zweng, M. M., Reagan, J. R., and Johnson, D. R.: Dissolved Inorganic
Nutrients (phosphate, nitrate, silicate), in: World Ocean Atlas 2013, edited
by: Levitus, S. and Mishonov, A., NOAA Atlas NESDIS 76, Silversprings,
Maryland, USA, https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/woa13/ (last access: 9 February 2022), 2013. a, b
Garland, J. A.: The dry deposition of sulphur dioxide to land and water surfaces, Proc. R. Soc. Land, A, 354, 245–268, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1977.0066, 1977. a
Gent, P. R. and McWilliams, J. C.: Isopycnal mixing in ocean circulation models, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 20, 150–155, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1990)020<0150:IMIOCM>2.0.CO;2, 1990. a
Gent, P. R., Willebrand, J., McDougall, T. J., and McWilliams, J. C.: Parameterizing Eddy-Induced Tracer Transports in Ocean Circulation Models, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 25, 463–474, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1995)025<0463:PEITTI>2.0.CO;2, 1995. a
Gidden, M. J., Riahi, K., Smith, S. J., Fujimori, S., Luderer, G., Kriegler, E., van Vuuren, D. P., van den Berg, M., Feng, L., Klein, D., Calvin, K., Doelman, J. C., Frank, S., Fricko, O., Harmsen, M., Hasegawa, T., Havlik, P., Hilaire, J., Hoesly, R., Horing, J., Popp, A., Stehfest, E., and Takahashi, K.: Global emissions pathways under different socioeconomic scenarios for use in CMIP6: a dataset of harmonized emissions trajectories through the end of the century, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1443–1475, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1443-2019, 2019. a, b
Good, P., Sellar, A., Tang, Y., Rumbold, S., Ellis, R., Kelley, D., Kuhlbrodt,
T., and Walton, J.: MOHC UKESM1.0-LL model output prepared for CMIP6
ScenarioMIP, WCRP [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.1567, 2019. a
Good, S. A., Martin, M. J., and Rayner, N. A.: EN4: Quality controlled ocean
temperature and salinity profiles and monthly objective analyses with
uncertainty estimates, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 118,
6704–6716, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JC009067, 2013 (data available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/en4/, last access: March 2023). a, b
Gregory, J. M., Andrews, T., Ceppi, P., Mauritsen, T., and Webb, M. J.: How
accurately can the climate sensitivity to CO2 be estimated from historical
climate change?, Clim. Dynam., 54, 129–157,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04991-y, 2020. a
Grosvenor, D. P. and Wood, R.: Daily MODIS (MODerate Imaging Spectroradiometer) derived cloud droplet number concentration global dataset for 2003–2015, Centre for Environmental Data Analysis, [data set] https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/cf97ccc802d348ec8a3b6f2995dfbbff (last access: March 2023), 2018. a
Grosvenor, D. P., Sourdeval, O., Zuidema, P., Ackerman, A., Alexandrov, M. D.,
Bennartz, R., Boers, R., Cairns, B., Chiu, J. C., Christensen, M., Deneke,
H. M., Diamond, M. S., Feingold, G., Fridlind, A., Hünerbein, A., Knist,
C. L., Kollias, P., Marshak, A., McCoy, D., Merk, D., Painemal, D., Rausch,
J., Rosenfeld, D., Russchenberg, H., Seifert, P., Sinclair, K., Stier, P.,
van Diedenhoven, B., Wendisch, M., Werner, F., Wood, R., Zhang, Z., and
Quaas, J.: Remote sensing of droplet number concentration in warm clouds: A
review of the current state of knowledge and perspectives, Rev.
Geophys., 56, 409–453, https://doi.org/10.1029/2017rg000593, 2018. a, b
Gurvan, M., Bourdallé-Badie, R., Bouttier, P.-A., Bricaud, C.,Bruciaferri, D., Calvert, D., Chanut, J., Clementi, E., Coward, A., Delrosso, D., Ethé, C., Flavoni, S., Graham, T., Harle, J., Iovino, D., Lea, D., Lévy, C., Lovato, T., Martin, N., Masson, S., Mocavero, S., Paul, J., Rousset, C., Storkey, D., Storto, A., and Vancoppenolle, M.: NEMO ocean engine, in: Notes du Pôle de modélisation de l'Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace (IPSL) (v3.6-patch, Number 27), Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3248739, 2017. a
Hansen, J., Sato, M., Ruedy, R., Nazarenko, L., Lacis, A., Schmidt, G. A.,
Russell, G., Aleinov, I., Bauer, M., Bauer, S., Bell, N., Cairns, B., Canuto,
V., Chandler, M., Cheng, Y., Del Genio, A., Faluvegi, G., Fleming, E.,
Friend, A., Hall, T., Jackman, C., Kelley, M., Kiang, N., Koch, D., Lean, J.,
Lerner, J., Lo, K., Menon, S., Miller, R., Minnis, P., Novakov, T., Oinas,
V., Perlwitz, J., Perlwitz, J., Rind, D., Romanou, A., Shindell, D., Stone,
P., Sun, S., Tausnev, N., Thresher, D., Wielicki, B., Wong, T., Yao, M., and
Zhang, S.: Efficacy of climate forcings, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 110, D18104, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005776, 2005. a
Hardacre, C., Mulcahy, J. P., Pope, R. J., Jones, C. G., Rumbold, S. T., Li, C., Johnson, C., and Turnock, S. T.: Evaluation of SO2, SO
Hill, P. G., Morcrette, C. J., and Boutle, I. A.: A regime-dependent
parametrization of subgrid-scale cloud water content variability, Q.
J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 141, 1975–1986,
https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2506, 2015. a
Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Tanre, D., Buis, J. P., Setzer, A.,
Vermote, E., Reagan, J. A., Kaufman, Y. J., Nakajima, T., Lavenu, F.,
Jankowiak, I., and Smirnov, A.: AERONET - A federated instrument network
and data archive for aerosol characterization, Remote Sens. Environ., 66,
1–16, 1998. a
Holben, B. N., Tanre, D., Smirnov, A., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Abuhassan, N.,
Newcomb, W. W., Schafer, J., Chatenet, B., Lavenue, F., Kaufman, Y. J.,
Castle, J. V., Setzer, A., Markham, B., Clark, D., Frouin, R., Halthore, R.,
Karnieli, A., O'Neill, N. T., Pietras, C., Pinker, R. T., Voss, K., and
Zibordi, G.: An emerging ground-based aerosol climatology: Aerosol Optical
Depth from AERONET, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 12067–12097, 2001. a
Hourdin, F., Mauritsen, T., Gettelman, A., Golaz, J.-C., Balaji, V., Duan, Q.,
Folini, D., Ji, D., Klocke, D., Qian, Y., Rauser, F., Rio, C., Tomassini, L.,
Watanabe, M., and Williamson, D.: The Art and Science of Climate Model
Tuning, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 589–602,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00135.1, 2017. a
Hsu, N. C., Tsay, S. C., King, M. D., and Herman, J. R.: Aerosol Properties
over Bright-Reflecting Source Regions, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 42, 557–569, 2004. a
Hunke, E. C., Lipscomb, W. H., Turner, A. K., Jeffery, N., and Elliott, S.: CICE: the Los Alamos Sea Ice Model Documentation and Software User's Manual Version 5.1, LA-CC-06-012, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM [code], https://code.metoffice.gov.uk/trac/cice/browser (last access: March 2022), 2015. a
Ishii, M., Fukuda, Y., Hirahara, S., Yasui, S., Suzuki, T., and Sato, K.:
Accuracy of Global Upper Ocean Heat Content Estimation Expected from Present
Observational Data Sets, SOLA, 13, 163–167, https://doi.org/10.2151/sola.2017-030,
2017. a
Jones, C. D., Arora, V., Friedlingstein, P., Bopp, L., Brovkin, V., Dunne, J., Graven, H., Hoffman, F., Ilyina, T., John, J. G., Jung, M., Kawamiya, M., Koven, C., Pongratz, J., Raddatz, T., Randerson, J. T., and Zaehle, S.: C4MIP – The Coupled Climate–Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison Project: experimental protocol for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2853–2880, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2853-2016, 2016. a, b
Kiehl, J. T.: Twentieth century climate model response and climate sensitivity,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L22710, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL031383,
2007. a
Kuhlbrodt, T., Jones, C. G., Sellar, A., Storkey, D., Blockley, E., Stringer,
M., Hill, R., Graham, T., Ridley, J., Blaker, A., Calvert, D., Copsey, D.,
Ellis, R., Hewitt, H., Hyder, P., Ineson, S., Mulcahy, J., Siahaan, A., and
Walton, J.: The Low-Resolution Version of HadGEM3 GC3.1: Development and
Evaluation for Global Climate, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10, 2865–2888, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001370, 2018. a, b, c, d
Levitus, S., Antonov, J. I., Boyer, T. P., Baranova, O. K., Garcia, H. E.,
Locarnini, R. A., Mishonov, A. V., Reagan, J. R., Seidov, D., Yarosh, E. S.,
and Zweng, M. M.: World ocean heat content and thermosteric sea level change
(0–2000 m), 1955–2010, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L10603,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051106, 2012. a, b
Mahlstein, I. and Knutti, R.: September Arctic sea ice predicted to disappear
near 2 ∘C global warming above present, J. Geophys. Res., 117,
D06104, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016709, 2012. a
Mahowald, N. M., Baker, A. R., Bergametti, G., Brooks, N., Duce, R. A.,
Jickells, T. D., Kubilay, N., Prospero, J. M., and Tegen, I.: Atmospheric
global dust cycle and iron inputs to the ocean, Global Biogeochem. Cycles,
19, GB4025, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GB002402, 2005. a
Mauritsen, T. and Roeckner, E.: Tuning the MPI-ESM1.2 Global Climate Model to
Improve the Match With Instrumental Record Warming by Lowering Its Climate
Sensitivity, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12,
e2019MS002037, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002037, 2020. a
McDuffie, E. E., Smith, S. J., O'Rourke, P., Tibrewal, K., Venkataraman, C., Marais, E. A., Zheng, B., Crippa, M., Brauer, M., and Martin, R. V.: A global anthropogenic emission inventory of atmospheric pollutants from sector- and fuel-specific sources (1970–2017): an application of the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3413–3442, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3413-2020, 2020. a
Menary, M. B., Roberts, C. D., Palmer, M. D., Halloran, P. R., Jackson, L.,
Wood, R. A., Müller, W. A., Matei, D., and Lee, S.-K.: Mechanisms of
aerosol-forced AMOC variability in a state of the art climate model, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 118, 2087–2096,
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrc.20178, 2013. a
Menary, M. B., Kuhlbrodt, T., Ridley, J., Andrews, M. B., Dimdore-Miles, O. B.,
Deshayes, J., Eade, R., Gray, L., Ineson, S., Mignot, J., Roberts, C. D.,
Robson, J., Wood, R. A., and Xavier, P.: Preindustrial Control Simulations
With HadGEM3-GC3.1 for CMIP6, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy.,
10, 3049–3075, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001495, 2018. a
Menary, M. B., Robson, J., Allan, R. P., Booth, B. B. B., Cassou, C.,
Gastineau, G., Gregory, J., Hodson, D., Jones, C., Mignot, J., Ringer, M.,
Sutton, R., Wilcox, L., and Zhang, R.: Aerosol-Forced AMOC Changes in CMIP6
Historical Simulations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL088166,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088166, 2020. a
Met Office: Unified Model, https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/approach/modelling-systems/unified-model, last access: March 2022. a
Moat, B. I., Frajka-Williams, E., Smeed,
D. A., Rayner, D., Johns, W. E., Baringer, M. O., Volkov, D., and Collins, J.: Atlantic meridional overturning circulation observed by the RAPID-MOCHA-WBTS (RAPID-Meridional Overturning Circulation and Heatflux Array-Western Boundary Time Series) array at 26N from 2004 to 2020 (v2020.2), British Oceanographic Data Centre – Natural Environment Research
Council, UK [data set], https://doi.org/10.5285/e91b10af-6f0a-7fa7-e053-6c86abc05a09, 2022. a
Morice, C. P., Kennedy, J. J., Rayner, N. A., Winn, J. P., Hogan, E., Killick,
R. E., Dunn, R. J. H., Osborn, T. J., Jones, P. D., and Simpson, I. R.: An
Updated Assessment of Near-Surface Temperature Change From 1850: The HadCRUT5
Data Set, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126,
e2019JD032361, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD032361, 2021 (data available at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut5/, last access: 11 November 2021). a, b, c, d, e
Mulcahy, J., S., R., Y., T., Walton, J., Hardacre, C., Stringer, M., Hill, R.,
Kuhlbrodt, T., and Jones, C.: MOHC UKESM1.1-LL model output prepared for
CMIP6 CMIP. Version 20220624, WCRP [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.16781, 2022. a, b
Mulcahy, J. P.: Supplementary material for manuscript “UKESM1.1: Development
and evaluation of an updated configuration of the UK Earth System Model”, Zenodo [code],
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6535737, 2022. a
Mulcahy, J. P., Jones, C., Sellar, A., Johnson, B., Boutle, I. A., Jones, A.,
Andrews, T., Rumbold, S. T., Mollard, J., Bellouin, N., Johnson, C. E.,
Williams, K. D., Grosvenor, D. P., and McCoy, D. T.: Improved Aerosol
Processes and Effective Radiative Forcing in HadGEM3 and UKESM1, J.
Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10, 2786–2805,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001464, 2018. a, b, c
Mulcahy, J. P., Johnson, C., Jones, C. G., Povey, A. C., Scott, C. E., Sellar, A., Turnock, S. T., Woodhouse, M. T., Abraham, N. L., Andrews, M. B., Bellouin, N., Browse, J., Carslaw, K. S., Dalvi, M., Folberth, G. A., Glover, M., Grosvenor, D. P., Hardacre, C., Hill, R., Johnson, B., Jones, A., Kipling, Z., Mann, G., Mollard, J., O'Connor, F. M., Palmiéri, J., Reddington, C., Rumbold, S. T., Richardson, M., Schutgens, N. A. J., Stier, P., Stringer, M., Tang, Y., Walton, J., Woodward, S., and Yool, A.: Description and evaluation of aerosol in UKESM1 and HadGEM3-GC3.1 CMIP6 historical simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 6383–6423, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6383-2020, 2020. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k
NASA: NASA Earth data, https://earthdata.nasa.gov, last access: 9 February 2022. a
NCAS Computational Modelling Services: UKESM1.1 Release Notes, https://cms.ncas.ac.uk/unified-model/configurations/ukesm/relnotes-1.1/, last access: 6 March 2023. a
Ocean Productivity: Welcome to the Ocean Productivity Home Page, Ocean Productivity [data set], http://sites.science.oregonstate.edu/ocean.productivity/, last access: 9 February 2022. a
O'Connor, F. M., Johnson, C. E., Morgenstern, O., Abraham, N. L., Braesicke, P., Dalvi, M., Folberth, G. A., Sanderson, M. G., Telford, P. J., Voulgarakis, A., Young, P. J., Zeng, G., Collins, W. J., and Pyle, J. A.: Evaluation of the new UKCA climate-composition model – Part 2: The Troposphere, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 41–91, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-41-2014, 2014. a
O'Connor, F. M., Abraham, N. L., Dalvi, M., Folberth, G. A., Griffiths, P. T., Hardacre, C., Johnson, B. T., Kahana, R., Keeble, J., Kim, B., Morgenstern, O., Mulcahy, J. P., Richardson, M., Robertson, E., Seo, J., Shim, S., Teixeira, J. C., Turnock, S. T., Williams, J., Wiltshire, A. J., Woodward, S., and Zeng, G.: Assessment of pre-industrial to present-day anthropogenic climate forcing in UKESM1, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1211–1243, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1211-2021, 2021. a, b
Oki, T. and Sud, Y. C.: Design of Total Runoff Integrating Pathways
(TRIP) – A Global River Channel Network, Earth Interactions, 2, 1–37,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1087-3562(1998)002<0001:DOTRIP>2.3.CO;2, 1998. a
O'Neill, B. C., Tebaldi, C., van Vuuren, D. P., Eyring, V., Friedlingstein, P., Hurtt, G., Knutti, R., Kriegler, E., Lamarque, J.-F., Lowe, J., Meehl, G. A., Moss, R., Riahi, K., and Sanderson, B. M.: The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3461–3482, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016, 2016. a
Pincus, R., Forster, P. M., and Stevens, B.: The Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (RFMIP): experimental protocol for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3447–3460, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3447-2016, 2016. a, b, c
Purkey, S. G. and Johnson, G. C.: Warming of global abyssal and deep Southern
Ocean waters between the 1990s and 2000s: Contributions to global heat and
sea level rise budgets, J. Climate, 23, 6336–6351,
https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3682.1, 2010. a
Ranjithkumar, A., Gordon, H., Williamson, C., Rollins, A., Pringle, K., Kupc, A., Abraham, N. L., Brock, C., and Carslaw, K.: Constraints on global aerosol number concentration, SO2 and condensation sink in UKESM1 using ATom measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4979–5014, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4979-2021, 2021. a
Revell, L. E., Kremser, S., Hartery, S., Harvey, M., Mulcahy, J. P., Williams, J., Morgenstern, O., McDonald, A. J., Varma, V., Bird, L., and Schuddeboom, A.: The sensitivity of Southern Ocean aerosols and cloud microphysics to sea spray and sulfate aerosol production in the HadGEM3-GA7.1 chemistry–climate model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15447–15466, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15447-2019, 2019. a
Richter, J. H., Anstey, J. A., Butchart, N., Kawatani, Y., Meehl, G. A.,
Osprey, S., and Simpson, I. R.: Progress in Simulating the Quasi-Biennial
Oscillation in CMIP Models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
125, e2019JD032362, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD032362, 2020. a
Ridley, J. K., Blockley, E. W., Keen, A. B., Rae, J. G. L., West, A. E., and Schroeder, D.: The sea ice model component of HadGEM3-GC3.1, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 713–723, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-713-2018, 2018. a
Robson, J., Aksenov, Y., Bracegirdle, T. J., Dimdore-Miles, O., Griffiths,
P. T., Grosvenor, D. P., Hodson, D. L. R., Keeble, J., MacIntosh, C., Megann,
A., Osprey, S., Povey, A. C., Schröder, D., Yang, M., Archibald, A. T.,
Carslaw, K. S., Gray, L., Jones, C., Kerridge, B., Knappett, D., Kuhlbrodt,
T., Russo, M., Sellar, A., Siddans, R., Sinha, B., Sutton, R., Walton, J.,
and Wilcox, L. J.: The Evaluation of the North Atlantic Climate System in
UKESM1 Historical Simulations for CMIP6, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2020MS002126,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002126, 2020. a, b
Rosenblum, E. and Eisenman, I.: Sea ice trends in climate models only accurate
in run with biased global warming, J. Climate, 30, 6265–6278,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0455.1, 2017. a
Salvi, P., Ceppi, P., and Gregory, J. M.: Interpreting Differences in Radiative
Feedbacks From Aerosols Versus Greenhouse Gases, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 49, e2022GL097766, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL097766,
2022. a
Schmidt, G. A., Bader, D., Donner, L. J., Elsaesser, G. S., Golaz, J.-C., Hannay, C., Molod, A., Neale, R. B., and Saha, S.: Practice and philosophy of climate model tuning across six US modeling centers, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3207–3223, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3207-2017, 2017. a
Schweiger, A., Lindsay, R., Zhang, J., Steele, M., Stern, H., and Kwok, R.:
Uncertainty in modeled Arctic sea ice volume, J. Geophys.
Res.-Oceans, 116, C00D06, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JC007084, 2011. a
Sellar, A. A., Jones, C. G., Mulcahy, J. P., Tang, Y., Yool, A., Wiltshire, A.,
O'Connor, F. M., Stringer, M., Hill, R., Palmieri, J., Woodward, S., de Mora,
L., Kuhlbrodt, T., Rumbold, S., Kelley, D. I., Ellis, R., Johnson, C. E.,
Walton, J., Abraham, N. L., Andrews, M. B., Andrews, T., Archibald, A. T.,
Berthou, S., Burke, E., Blockley, E., Carslaw, K., Dalvi, M., Edwards, J.,
Folberth, G. A., Gedney, N., Griffiths, P. T., Harper, A. B., Hendry, M. A.,
Hewitt, A. J., Johnson, B., Jones, A., Jones, C. D., Keeble, J., Liddicoat,
S., Morgenstern, O., Parker, R. J., Predoi, V., Robertson, E., Siahaan, A.,
Smith, R. S., Swaminathan, R., Woodhouse, M., Zeng, G., and Zerroukat, M.:
UKESM1: Description and evaluation of the UK Earth System Model, J.
Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 4513–4558, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001739, 2019. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, p, q
Sellar, A. A., Walton, J., Jones, C. G., Wood, R., Abraham, N. L., Andrejczuk,
M., Andrews, M. B., Andrews, T., Archibald, A. T., de Mora, L., Dyson, H.,
Elkington, M., Ellis, R., Florek, P., Good, P., Gohar, L., Haddad, S.,
Hardiman, S. C., Hogan, E., Iwi, A., Jones, C. D., Johnson, B., Kelley,
D. I., Kettleborough, J., Knight, J. R., Köhler, M. O., Kuhlbrodt, T.,
Liddicoat, S., Linova-Pavlova, I., Mizielinski, M. S., Morgenstern, O.,
Mulcahy, J., Neininger, E., O'Connor, F. M., Petrie, R., Ridley, J., Rioual,
J.-C., Roberts, M., Robertson, E., Rumbold, S., Seddon, J., Shepherd, H.,
Shim, S., Stephens, A., Teixiera, J. C., Tang, Y., Williams, J., Wiltshire,
A., and Griffiths, P. T.: Implementation of U.K. Earth System Models for
CMIP6, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001946,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001946, 2020. a
Senior, C. A., Jones, C. G., Wood, R. A., Sellar, A., Belcher, S., Klein-Tank,
A., Sutton, R., Walton, J., Lawrence, B., Andrews, T., and Mulcahy, J. P.:
U.K. Community Earth System Modeling for CMIP6, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002004,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002004, 2020. a
Shindell, D. T.: Inhomogeneous forcing and transient climate sensitivity,
Nat. Clim. Change, 4, 274–277, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2136, 2014. a
Smeed, D. A., Josey, S. A., Beaulieu, C., Johns, W. E., Moat, B. I.,
Frajka-Williams, E., Rayner, D., Meinen, C. S., Baringer, M. O., Bryden,
H. L., and McCarthy, G. D.: The North Atlantic Ocean Is in a State of
Reduced Overturning, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 1527–1533,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076350, 2018. a, b
Smith, F. and Jeffrey, G.: Airborne transport of sulphur dioxide from the
U.K., Atmos. Environ., 9, 643–659,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(75)90008-6, 1975. a
Storkey, D., Blaker, A. T., Mathiot, P., Megann, A., Aksenov, Y., Blockley, E. W., Calvert, D., Graham, T., Hewitt, H. T., Hyder, P., Kuhlbrodt, T., Rae, J. G. L., and Sinha, B.: UK Global Ocean GO6 and GO7: a traceable hierarchy of model resolutions, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3187–3213, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3187-2018, 2018. a
Tang, Y., Rumbold, S., Ellis, R., Kelley, D., Mulcahy, J., Sellar, A., Walton,
J., and Jones, C.: MOHC UKESM1.0-LL model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP, WCRP [data set],
https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.1569, 2019. a
Taylor, K. E., Crucifix, M., Braconnot, P., Hewitt, C. D., Doutriaux, C.,
Broccoli, A. J., Mitchell, J. F. B., and Webb, M. J.: Estimating Shortwave
Radiative Forcing and Response in Climate Models, J. Climate, 20,
2530–2543, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI4143.1, 2007. a
Thomas, G. E., Poulsen, C. A., Sayer, A. M., Marsh, S. H., Dean, S. M., Carboni, E., Siddans, R., Grainger, R. G., and Lawrence, B. N.: The GRAPE aerosol retrieval algorithm, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 2, 679–701, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2-679-2009, 2009. a
Titchner, H. A. and Rayner, N. A.: The Met Office Hadley Centre sea ice and
sea surface temperature data set, version 2: 1. Sea ice concentrations,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 2864–2889,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020316, 2014. a
Tørseth, K., Aas, W., Breivik, K., Fjæraa, A. M., Fiebig, M., Hjellbrekke, A. G., Lund Myhre, C., Solberg, S., and Yttri, K. E.: Introduction to the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP) and observed atmospheric composition change during 1972–2009, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 5447–5481, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-5447-2012, 2012 (data available at: http://ebas.nilu.no/, last access: 11 February 2022). a
von Schuckmann, K., Palmer, M. D., Trenberth, K. E., Cazenave, A., Chambers,
D., Champollion, N., Hansen, J., Josey, S. A., Loeb, N., Mathieu, P. P.,
Meyssignac, B., and Wild, M.: An imperative to monitor Earth's energy
imbalance, Nat. Clim. Change, 6, 138–144, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2876, 2016. a
Walters, D., Baran, A. J., 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., Carslaw, K., Dalvi, M., Essery, R., Gedney, N., Hardiman, S., Johnson, B., Johnson, C., Jones, A., Jones, C., 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., 12, 1909–1963, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1909-2019, 2019 (code available at: https://jules.jchmr.org, last access: March 2022). a, b
Walters, D. N., Williams, K. D., Boutle, I. A., Bushell, A. C., Edwards, J. M., Field, P. R., Lock, A. P., Morcrette, C. J., Stratton, R. A., Wilkinson, J. M., Willett, M. R., Bellouin, N., Bodas-Salcedo, A., Brooks, M. E., Copsey, D., Earnshaw, P. D., Hardiman, S. C., Harris, C. M., Levine, R. C., MacLachlan, C., Manners, J. C., Martin, G. M., Milton, S. F., Palmer, M. D., Roberts, M. J., Rodríguez, J. M., Tennant, W. J., and Vidale, P. L.: The Met Office Unified Model Global Atmosphere 4.0 and JULES Global Land 4.0 configurations, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 361–386, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-361-2014, 2014. a
Walton, J., Mulcahy, J., Tang, Y., Rumbold, S., Hardacre, C., Stringer, M.,
Hill, R., Kuhlbrodt, T., and Jones, C.: MOHC UKESM1.1-LL model output
prepared for CMIP6 ScenarioMIP, WCRP [data set], https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.16782, 2022. a
Wesely, M.: Parameterization of surface resistances to gaseous dry deposition
in regional-scale numerical models, Atmos. Environ., 23, 1293–1304, 1989. a
West, R. E. L., Stier, P., Jones, A., Johnson, C. E., Mann, G. W., Bellouin, N., Partridge, D. G., and Kipling, Z.: The importance of vertical velocity variability for estimates of the indirect aerosol effects, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 6369–6393, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-6369-2014, 2014. a
Williams, K. D., Copsey, D., Blockley, E. W., Bodas-Salcedo, A., Calvert, D.,
Comer, R., Davis, P., Graham, T., Hewitt, H. T., Hill, R., Hyder, P., Ineson,
S., Johns, T. C., Keen, A. B., Lee, R. W., Megann, A., Milton, S. F., Rae, J.
G. L., Roberts, M. J., Scaife, A. A., Schiemann, R., Storkey, D., Thorpe, L.,
Watterson, I. G., Walters, D. N., West, A., Wood, R. A., Woollings, T., and
Xavier, P. K.: The Met Office Global Coupled Model 3.0 and 3.1 (GC3.0 and
GC3.1) Configurations, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10,
357–380, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001115, 2017. a, b
Woodward, S.: Modelling the atmospheric life cycle and radiative impact of
mineral dust in the Hadley Centre climate model, J. Geophys. Res., 106,
18155–18166, 2001. a
Woodward, S.: Mineral dust in HadGEM2, Hadley Centre Technical Note 87, Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom, 2011. a
Wys, J. N. D., Hill, A., and Robinson, E.: Assessment of the fate of Sulphur
Dioxide from a point source, in: Sulfur in the Atmosphere, edited by: HUSAR,
R., LODGE, J., and MOORE, D., Pergamon, 633–639,
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-022932-4.50065-3, 1978. a
Yool, A., Popova, E. E., and Anderson, T. R.: MEDUSA-2.0: an intermediate complexity biogeochemical model of the marine carbon cycle for climate change and ocean acidification studies, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 1767–1811, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-1767-2013, 2013. a, b
Yool, A., Palmieri, J., Jones, C. G., Sellar, A. A., de Mora, L., Kuhlbrodt,
T., Popova, E. E., Mulcahy, J., Wiltshire, A., Rumbold, S. T., Stringer, M.,
Hill, R., Tang, Y., Walton, J., Blaker, A., Nurser, A. J. G., Coward, A. C.,
Hirschi, J., Woodward, S., Kelley, D. I., and Ellis, R.: Spin-up of UK Earth
System Model 1 (UKESM1) for CMIP6, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001933, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001933, 2019. a
Yool, A., Palmiéri, J., Jones, C. G., de Mora, L., Kuhlbrodt, T., Popova, E. E., Nurser, A. J. G., Hirschi, J., Blaker, A. T., Coward, A. C., Blockley, E. W., and Sellar, A. A.: Evaluating the physical and biogeochemical state of the global ocean component of UKESM1 in CMIP6 historical simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3437–3472, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3437-2021, 2021. a, b, c, d
Zelinka, M. D., Andrews, T., Forster, P., and Taylor, K. E.: Quantifying
components of aerosol-cloud-radiation interactions in climate models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 7599–7615,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021710, 2014. a
Zhang, J., Furtado, K., Turnock, S. T., Mulcahy, J. P., Wilcox, L. J., Booth, B. B., Sexton, D., Wu, T., Zhang, F., and Liu, Q.: The role of anthropogenic aerosols in the anomalous cooling from 1960 to 1990 in the CMIP6 Earth system models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 18609–18627, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-18609-2021, 2021. a, b, c
Zhang, L., Brook, J. R., and Vet, R.: A revised parameterization for gaseous dry deposition in air-quality models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 2067–2082, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-2067-2003, 2003. a
Short summary
Recent global climate models simulate historical global mean surface temperatures which are too cold, possibly to due to excessive aerosol cooling. This raises questions about the models' ability to simulate important climate processes and reduces confidence in future climate predictions. We present a new version of the UK Earth System Model, which has an improved aerosols simulation and a historical temperature record. Interestingly, the long-term response to CO2 remains largely unchanged.
Recent global climate models simulate historical global mean surface temperatures which are too...
