Articles | Volume 17, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3687-2024
© Author(s) 2024. 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-17-3687-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Model experiment description paper
| 
08 May 2024
Model experiment description paper |
| 08 May 2024
| 08 May 2024
Leveraging regional mesh refinement to simulate future climate projections for California using the Simplified Convection-Permitting E3SM Atmosphere Model Version 0
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
Peter Bogenschutz
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
Philip Cameron-smith
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
Chengzhu Zhang
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
Related authors
Jishi Zhang, Peter Bogenschutz, Mark Taylor, and Philip Cameron-Smith
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2223, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2223, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We pushed a global cloud-resolving model to a novel 100 m resolution setup over the San Francisco Bay Area using a regionally refined mesh. The model captured fine-scale air motions over complex terrain and coastal regions at large-eddy scales with fully comprehensive global modeling configuration, enabled by scale-aware turbulence parameterization. Performance tests demonstrated that GPU acceleration can make such high-resolution simulations feasible within practical timeframes.
Peter A. Bogenschutz, Jishi Zhang, Qi Tang, and Philip Cameron-Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7029–7050, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7029-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7029-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Using high-resolution and state-of-the-art modeling techniques we simulate five atmospheric river events for California to test the capability to represent precipitation for these events. We find that our model is able to capture the distribution of precipitation very well but suffers from overestimating the precipitation amounts over high elevation. Increasing the resolution further has no impact on reducing this bias, while increasing the domain size does have modest impacts.
Ziming Ke, Qi Tang, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Xiaohong Liu, and Hailong Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4137–4153, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4137-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4137-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses volcanic aerosol representation in E3SM (Energy Exascale Earth System Model), showing that an emission-based approach moderately improves temperature variability and cloud responses compared to a prescribed forcing approach, yet significant bias persists.
Clara Orbe, Alison Ming, Gabriel Chiodo, Michael Prather, Mohamadou Diallo, Qi Tang, Andreas Chrysanthou, Hiroaki Naoe, Xin Zhou, Irina Thaler, Dillon Elsbury, Ewa Bednarz, Jonathon S. Wright, Aaron Match, Shingo Watanabe, James Anstey, Tobias Kerzenmacher, Stefan Versick, Marion Marchand, Feng Li, and James Keeble
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2761, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2761, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
The quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) is the main source of wind fluctuations in the tropical stratosphere, which can couple to surface climate. However, models do a poor job of simulating the QBO in the lower stratosphere, for reasons that remain unclear. One possibility is that models do not completely represent how ozone influences the QBO-associated wind variations. Here we propose a multi-model framework for assessing how ozone influences the QBO in recent past and future climates.
Jishi Zhang, Peter Bogenschutz, Mark Taylor, and Philip Cameron-Smith
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2223, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2223, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We pushed a global cloud-resolving model to a novel 100 m resolution setup over the San Francisco Bay Area using a regionally refined mesh. The model captured fine-scale air motions over complex terrain and coastal regions at large-eddy scales with fully comprehensive global modeling configuration, enabled by scale-aware turbulence parameterization. Performance tests demonstrated that GPU acceleration can make such high-resolution simulations feasible within practical timeframes.
Naser Mahfouz, Hassan Beydoun, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Noel Keen, Adam C. Varble, Luca Bertagna, Peter Bogenschutz, Andrew Bradley, Matthew W. Christensen, T. Conrad Clevenger, Aaron Donahue, Jerome Fast, James Foucar, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Oksana Guba, Walter Hannah, Benjamin Hillman, Robert Jacob, Wuyin Lin, Po-Lun Ma, Yun Qian, Balwinder Singh, Christopher Terai, Hailong Wang, Mingxuan Wu, Kai Zhang, Andrew Gettelman, Mark Taylor, L. Ruby Leung, Peter Caldwell, and Susannah Burrows
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1868, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1868, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study assesses the aerosol effective radiative forcing in a global cloud-resolving atmosphere model at ultra-high resolution. We demonstrate that global ERFaer signal can be robustly reproduced across resolutions when aerosol activation processes are carefully parameterized. Further, we argue that simplified prescribed aerosol schemes will open the door for further process/mechanism studies under controlled conditions.
Katherine M. Smith, Alice M. Barthel, LeAnn M. Conlon, Luke P. Van Roekel, Anthony Bartoletti, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Chengzhu Zhang, Carolyn Branecky Begeman, James J. Benedict, Gautam Bisht, Yan Feng, Walter Hannah, Bryce E. Harrop, Nicole Jeffery, Wuyin Lin, Po-Lun Ma, Mathew E. Maltrud, Mark R. Petersen, Balwinder Singh, Qi Tang, Teklu Tesfa, Jonathan D. Wolfe, Shaocheng Xie, Xue Zheng, Karthik Balaguru, Oluwayemi Garuba, Peter Gleckler, Aixue Hu, Jiwoo Lee, Ben Moore-Maley, and Ana C. Ordoñez
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1613–1633, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1613-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1613-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Version 2.1 of the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) adds the Fox-Kemper et al. (2011) mixed-layer eddy parameterization, which restratifies the ocean surface layer through an overturning streamfunction. Results include surface layer bias reduction in temperature, salinity, and sea ice extent in the North Atlantic; a small strengthening of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation; and improvements to many atmospheric climatological variables.
Peter A. Bogenschutz, Jishi Zhang, Qi Tang, and Philip Cameron-Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7029–7050, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7029-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7029-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Using high-resolution and state-of-the-art modeling techniques we simulate five atmospheric river events for California to test the capability to represent precipitation for these events. We find that our model is able to capture the distribution of precipitation very well but suffers from overestimating the precipitation amounts over high elevation. Increasing the resolution further has no impact on reducing this bias, while increasing the domain size does have modest impacts.
Jinbo Xie, Qi Tang, Michael Prather, Jadwiga Richter, and Shixuan Zhang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1927, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1927, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Analysis of the interaction between the climate and ozone in the stratosphere is complicated by the in-ability climate model in simulating the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO) – an important climate mode in the stratosphere. We use a set of model simulation that realistically simulate QBO and a novel ozone diagnostic tool to separate the temperature and circulation-driven QBO impact. These are important for diagnosing model-model differences in the QBO-ozone responses for climate projections.
Jiwoo Lee, Peter J. Gleckler, Min-Seop Ahn, Ana Ordonez, Paul A. Ullrich, Kenneth R. Sperber, Karl E. Taylor, Yann Y. Planton, Eric Guilyardi, Paul Durack, Celine Bonfils, Mark D. Zelinka, Li-Wei Chao, Bo Dong, Charles Doutriaux, Chengzhu Zhang, Tom Vo, Jason Boutte, Michael F. Wehner, Angeline G. Pendergrass, Daehyun Kim, Zeyu Xue, Andrew T. Wittenberg, and John Krasting
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3919–3948, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3919-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3919-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce an open-source software, the PCMDI Metrics Package (PMP), developed for a comprehensive comparison of Earth system models (ESMs) with real-world observations. Using diverse metrics evaluating climatology, variability, and extremes simulated in thousands of simulations from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), PMP aids in benchmarking model improvements across generations. PMP also enables efficient tracking of performance evolutions during ESM developments.
John T. Fasullo, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Julie M. Caron, Nan Rosenbloom, Gerald A. Meehl, Warren Strand, Sasha Glanville, Samantha Stevenson, Maria Molina, Christine A. Shields, Chengzhu Zhang, James Benedict, Hailong Wang, and Tony Bartoletti
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 367–386, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-367-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-367-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate model large ensembles provide a unique and invaluable means for estimating the climate response to external forcing agents and quantify contrasts in model structure. Here, an overview of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) version 2 large ensemble is given along with comparisons to large ensembles from E3SM version 1 and versions 1 and 2 of the Community Earth System Model. The paper provides broad and important context for users of these ensembles.
Hsiang-He Lee, Qi Tang, and Michael Prather
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-203, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-203, 2024
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
The E3SM Chemistry diagnostics package (ChemDyg) is a software tool, which is designed for the global climate model (E3SM) chemistry development. ChemDyg generates several diagnostic plots and tables for model-to-model and model-to-observation comparison, including 2-dimentional contour mapping plots, diurnal and annual cycle, time-series plots, and comprehensive processing tables. This paper is to introduce the details of each diagnostics set and its required input data formats in ChemDyg.
Yuying Zhang, Shaocheng Xie, Yi Qin, Wuyin Lin, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Xue Zheng, Po-Lun Ma, Yun Qian, Qi Tang, Christopher R. Terai, and Meng Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 169–189, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-169-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-169-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We performed systematic evaluation of clouds simulated in the Energy
Exascale Earth System Model (E3SMv2) to document model performance and understand what updates in E3SMv2 have caused changes in clouds from E3SMv1 to E3SMv2. We find that stratocumulus clouds along the subtropical west coast of continents are dramatically improved, primarily due to the retuning done in CLUBB. This study offers additional insights into clouds simulated in E3SMv2 and will benefit future E3SM developments.
Exascale Earth System Model (E3SMv2) to document model performance and understand what updates in E3SMv2 have caused changes in clouds from E3SMv1 to E3SMv2. We find that stratocumulus clouds along the subtropical west coast of continents are dramatically improved, primarily due to the retuning done in CLUBB. This study offers additional insights into clouds simulated in E3SMv2 and will benefit future E3SM developments.
Qi Tang, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Luke P. Van Roekel, Mark A. Taylor, Wuyin Lin, Benjamin R. Hillman, Paul A. Ullrich, Andrew M. Bradley, Oksana Guba, Jonathan D. Wolfe, Tian Zhou, Kai Zhang, Xue Zheng, Yunyan Zhang, Meng Zhang, Mingxuan Wu, Hailong Wang, Cheng Tao, Balwinder Singh, Alan M. Rhoades, Yi Qin, Hong-Yi Li, Yan Feng, Yuying Zhang, Chengzhu Zhang, Charles S. Zender, Shaocheng Xie, Erika L. Roesler, Andrew F. Roberts, Azamat Mametjanov, Mathew E. Maltrud, Noel D. Keen, Robert L. Jacob, Christiane Jablonowski, Owen K. Hughes, Ryan M. Forsyth, Alan V. Di Vittorio, Peter M. Caldwell, Gautam Bisht, Renata B. McCoy, L. Ruby Leung, and David C. Bader
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3953–3995, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3953-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3953-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
High-resolution simulations are superior to low-resolution ones in capturing regional climate changes and climate extremes. However, uniformly reducing the grid size of a global Earth system model is too computationally expensive. We provide an overview of the fully coupled regionally refined model (RRM) of E3SMv2 and document a first-of-its-kind set of climate production simulations using RRM at an economic cost. The key to this success is our innovative hybrid time step method.
Dana L. McGuffin, Philip J. Cameron-Smith, Matthew A. Horsley, Brian J. Bauman, Wim De Vries, Denis Healy, Alex Pertica, Chris Shaffer, and Lance M. Simms
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 16, 2129–2144, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-2129-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-2129-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This work demonstrates the viability of a remote sensing technique using nanosatellites to measure stratospheric temperature. This measurement technique can probe the stratosphere and mesosphere at a fine vertical scale around the globe unlike other high-altitude measurement techniques, which would provide an opportunity to observe atmospheric gravity waves and turbulence. We analyze observations from two satellite platforms to provide a proof of concept and characterize measurement uncertainty.
Maria J. Chinita, Mikael Witte, Marcin J. Kurowski, Joao Teixeira, Kay Suselj, Georgios Matheou, and Peter Bogenschutz
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1909–1924, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1909-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1909-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Low clouds are one of the largest sources of uncertainty in climate prediction. In this paper, we introduce the first version of the unified turbulence and shallow convection parameterization named SHOC+MF developed to improve the representation of shallow cumulus clouds in the Simple Cloud-Resolving E3SM Atmosphere Model (SCREAM). Here, we also show promising preliminary results in a single-column model framework for two benchmark cases of shallow cumulus convection.
Peter A. Bogenschutz, Hsiang-He Lee, Qi Tang, and Takanobu Yamaguchi
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 335–352, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-335-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-335-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Models that are used to simulate and predict climate often have trouble representing specific cloud types, such as stratocumulus, that are particularly thin in the vertical direction. It has been found that increasing the model resolution can help improve this problem. In this paper, we develop a novel framework that increases the horizontal and vertical resolutions only for areas of the globe that contain stratocumulus, hence reducing the model runtime while providing better results.
Chengzhu Zhang, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Ryan Forsyth, Tom Vo, Shaocheng Xie, Zeshawn Shaheen, Gerald L. Potter, Xylar S. Asay-Davis, Charles S. Zender, Wuyin Lin, Chih-Chieh Chen, Chris R. Terai, Salil Mahajan, Tian Zhou, Karthik Balaguru, Qi Tang, Cheng Tao, Yuying Zhang, Todd Emmenegger, Susannah Burrows, and Paul A. Ullrich
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 9031–9056, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9031-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9031-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system model (ESM) developers run automated analysis tools on data from candidate models to inform model development. This paper introduces a new Python package, E3SM Diags, that has been developed to support ESM development and use routinely in the development of DOE's Energy Exascale Earth System Model. This tool covers a set of essential diagnostics to evaluate the mean physical climate from simulations, as well as several process-oriented and phenomenon-based evaluation diagnostics.
Kai Zhang, Wentao Zhang, Hui Wan, Philip J. Rasch, Steven J. Ghan, Richard C. Easter, Xiangjun Shi, Yong Wang, Hailong Wang, Po-Lun Ma, Shixuan Zhang, Jian Sun, Susannah M. Burrows, Manish Shrivastava, Balwinder Singh, Yun Qian, Xiaohong Liu, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Qi Tang, Xue Zheng, Shaocheng Xie, Wuyin Lin, Yan Feng, Minghuai Wang, Jin-Ho Yoon, and L. Ruby Leung
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9129–9160, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9129-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9129-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Here we analyze the effective aerosol forcing simulated by E3SM version 1 using both century-long free-running and short nudged simulations. The aerosol forcing in E3SMv1 is relatively large compared to other models, mainly due to the large indirect aerosol effect. Aerosol-induced changes in liquid and ice cloud properties in E3SMv1 have a strong correlation. The aerosol forcing estimates in E3SMv1 are sensitive to the parameterization changes in both liquid and ice cloud processes.
Xue Zheng, Qing Li, Tian Zhou, Qi Tang, Luke P. Van Roekel, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Hailong Wang, and Philip Cameron-Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3941–3967, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3941-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3941-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We document the model experiments for the future climate projection by E3SMv1.0. At the highest future emission scenario, E3SMv1.0 projects a strong surface warming with rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, sea ice, and land runoff. Specifically, we detect a significant polar amplification and accelerated warming linked to the unmasking of the aerosol effects. The impact of greenhouse gas forcing is examined in different climate components.
Po-Lun Ma, Bryce E. Harrop, Vincent E. Larson, Richard B. Neale, Andrew Gettelman, Hugh Morrison, Hailong Wang, Kai Zhang, Stephen A. Klein, Mark D. Zelinka, Yuying Zhang, Yun Qian, Jin-Ho Yoon, Christopher R. Jones, Meng Huang, Sheng-Lun Tai, Balwinder Singh, Peter A. Bogenschutz, Xue Zheng, Wuyin Lin, Johannes Quaas, Hélène Chepfer, Michael A. Brunke, Xubin Zeng, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Samson Hagos, Zhibo Zhang, Hua Song, Xiaohong Liu, Michael S. Pritchard, Hui Wan, Jingyu Wang, Qi Tang, Peter M. Caldwell, Jiwen Fan, Larry K. Berg, Jerome D. Fast, Mark A. Taylor, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Shaocheng Xie, Philip J. Rasch, and L. Ruby Leung
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2881–2916, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2881-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2881-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
An alternative set of parameters for E3SM Atmospheric Model version 1 has been developed based on a tuning strategy that focuses on clouds. When clouds in every regime are improved, other aspects of the model are also improved, even though they are not the direct targets for calibration. The recalibrated model shows a lower sensitivity to anthropogenic aerosols and surface warming, suggesting potential improvements to the simulated climate in the past and future.
Yongkang Xue, Tandong Yao, Aaron A. Boone, Ismaila Diallo, Ye Liu, Xubin Zeng, William K. M. Lau, Shiori Sugimoto, Qi Tang, Xiaoduo Pan, Peter J. van Oevelen, Daniel Klocke, Myung-Seo Koo, Tomonori Sato, Zhaohui Lin, Yuhei Takaya, Constantin Ardilouze, Stefano Materia, Subodh K. Saha, Retish Senan, Tetsu Nakamura, Hailan Wang, Jing Yang, Hongliang Zhang, Mei Zhao, Xin-Zhong Liang, J. David Neelin, Frederic Vitart, Xin Li, Ping Zhao, Chunxiang Shi, Weidong Guo, Jianping Tang, Miao Yu, Yun Qian, Samuel S. P. Shen, Yang Zhang, Kun Yang, Ruby Leung, Yuan Qiu, Daniele Peano, Xin Qi, Yanling Zhan, Michael A. Brunke, Sin Chan Chou, Michael Ek, Tianyi Fan, Hong Guan, Hai Lin, Shunlin Liang, Helin Wei, Shaocheng Xie, Haoran Xu, Weiping Li, Xueli Shi, Paulo Nobre, Yan Pan, Yi Qin, Jeff Dozier, Craig R. Ferguson, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Qing Bao, Jinming Feng, Jinkyu Hong, Songyou Hong, Huilin Huang, Duoying Ji, Zhenming Ji, Shichang Kang, Yanluan Lin, Weiguang Liu, Ryan Muncaster, Patricia de Rosnay, Hiroshi G. Takahashi, Guiling Wang, Shuyu Wang, Weicai Wang, Xu Zhou, and Yuejian Zhu
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4465–4494, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4465-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4465-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The subseasonal prediction of extreme hydroclimate events such as droughts/floods has remained stubbornly low for years. This paper presents a new international initiative which, for the first time, introduces spring land surface temperature anomalies over high mountains to improve precipitation prediction through remote effects of land–atmosphere interactions. More than 40 institutions worldwide are participating in this effort. The experimental protocol and preliminary results are presented.
James Keeble, Birgit Hassler, Antara Banerjee, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Gabriel Chiodo, Sean Davis, Veronika Eyring, Paul T. Griffiths, Olaf Morgenstern, Peer Nowack, Guang Zeng, Jiankai Zhang, Greg Bodeker, Susannah Burrows, Philip Cameron-Smith, David Cugnet, Christopher Danek, Makoto Deushi, Larry W. Horowitz, Anne Kubin, Lijuan Li, Gerrit Lohmann, Martine Michou, Michael J. Mills, Pierre Nabat, Dirk Olivié, Sungsu Park, Øyvind Seland, Jens Stoll, Karl-Hermann Wieners, and Tongwen Wu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 5015–5061, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5015-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5015-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric ozone and water vapour are key components of the Earth system; changes to both have important impacts on global and regional climate. We evaluate changes to these species from 1850 to 2100 in the new generation of CMIP6 models. There is good agreement between the multi-model mean and observations, although there is substantial variation between the individual models. The future evolution of both ozone and water vapour is strongly dependent on the assumed future emissions scenario.
Yong Wang, Guang J. Zhang, Shaocheng Xie, Wuyin Lin, George C. Craig, Qi Tang, and Hsi-Yen Ma
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1575–1593, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1575-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1575-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A stochastic deep convection parameterization is implemented into the US Department of Energy Energy Exascale Earth System Model Atmosphere Model version 1 (EAMv1). Compared to the default model, the well-known problem of
too much light rain and too little heavy rainis largely alleviated over the tropics with the stochastic scheme. Results from this study provide important insights into the model performance of EAMv1 when stochasticity is included in the deep convective parameterization.
Qi Tang, Michael J. Prather, Juno Hsu, Daniel J. Ruiz, Philip J. Cameron-Smith, Shaocheng Xie, and Jean-Christophe Golaz
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1219–1236, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1219-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1219-2021, 2021
Claudia Tebaldi, Kevin Debeire, Veronika Eyring, Erich Fischer, John Fyfe, Pierre Friedlingstein, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Brian O'Neill, Benjamin Sanderson, Detlef van Vuuren, Keywan Riahi, Malte Meinshausen, Zebedee Nicholls, Katarzyna B. Tokarska, George Hurtt, Elmar Kriegler, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Gerald Meehl, Richard Moss, Susanne E. Bauer, Olivier Boucher, Victor Brovkin, Young-Hwa Byun, Martin Dix, Silvio Gualdi, Huan Guo, Jasmin G. John, Slava Kharin, YoungHo Kim, Tsuyoshi Koshiro, Libin Ma, Dirk Olivié, Swapna Panickal, Fangli Qiao, Xinyao Rong, Nan Rosenbloom, Martin Schupfner, Roland Séférian, Alistair Sellar, Tido Semmler, Xiaoying Shi, Zhenya Song, Christian Steger, Ronald Stouffer, Neil Swart, Kaoru Tachiiri, Qi Tang, Hiroaki Tatebe, Aurore Voldoire, Evgeny Volodin, Klaus Wyser, Xiaoge Xin, Shuting Yang, Yongqiang Yu, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 253–293, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present an overview of CMIP6 ScenarioMIP outcomes from up to 38 participating ESMs according to the new SSP-based scenarios. Average temperature and precipitation projections according to a wide range of forcings, spanning a wider range than the CMIP5 projections, are documented as global averages and geographic patterns. Times of crossing various warming levels are computed, together with benefits of mitigation for selected pairs of scenarios. Comparisons with CMIP5 are also discussed.
Landon A. Rieger, Jason N. S. Cole, John C. Fyfe, Stephen Po-Chedley, Philip J. Cameron-Smith, Paul J. Durack, Nathan P. Gillett, and Qi Tang
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4831–4843, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4831-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4831-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Recently, the stratospheric aerosol forcing dataset used as an input to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 was updated. This work explores the impact of those changes on the modelled historical climates in the CanESM5 and EAMv1 models. Temperature differences in the stratosphere shortly after the Pinatubo eruption are found to be significant, but surface temperatures and precipitation do not show a significant change.
Peter A. Bogenschutz, Shuaiqi Tang, Peter M. Caldwell, Shaocheng Xie, Wuyin Lin, and Yao-Sheng Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4443–4458, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4443-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4443-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This paper documents a tool that has been developed that can be used to accelerate the development and understanding of climate models. This version of the model, known as a the single-column model, is much faster to run than the full climate model, and we demonstrate that this tool can be used to quickly exploit model biases that arise due to physical processes. We show examples of how this single-column model can directly benefit the field.
Qi Tang, Stephen A. Klein, Shaocheng Xie, Wuyin Lin, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Erika L. Roesler, Mark A. Taylor, Philip J. Rasch, David C. Bader, Larry K. Berg, Peter Caldwell, Scott E. Giangrande, Richard B. Neale, Yun Qian, Laura D. Riihimaki, Charles S. Zender, Yuying Zhang, and Xue Zheng
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2679–2706, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2679-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2679-2019, 2019
Benjamin Brown-Steiner, Noelle E. Selin, Ronald Prinn, Simone Tilmes, Louisa Emmons, Jean-François Lamarque, and Philip Cameron-Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4155–4174, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4155-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4155-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We conduct three simulations of atmospheric chemistry using chemical mechanisms of different levels of complexity and compare their results to observations. We explore situations in which the simplified mechanisms match the output of the most complex mechanism, as well as when they diverge. We investigate how concurrent utilization of chemical mechanisms of different complexities can further our atmospheric-chemistry understanding at various scales and give some strategies for future research.
Kai Zhang, Philip J. Rasch, Mark A. Taylor, Hui Wan, Ruby Leung, Po-Lun Ma, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Jon Wolfe, Wuyin Lin, Balwinder Singh, Susannah Burrows, Jin-Ho Yoon, Hailong Wang, Yun Qian, Qi Tang, Peter Caldwell, and Shaocheng Xie
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1971–1988, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1971-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1971-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
The conservation of total water is an important numerical feature for global Earth system models. Even small conservation problems in the water budget can lead to systematic errors in century-long simulations for sea level rise projection. This study quantifies and reduces various sources of water conservation error in the atmosphere component of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model.
Peter A. Bogenschutz, Andrew Gettelman, Cecile Hannay, Vincent E. Larson, Richard B. Neale, Cheryl Craig, and Chih-Chieh Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 235–255, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-235-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-235-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This paper compares results of developmental versions of a widely used climate model. The simulations only differ in the choice of how to model the sub-grid-scale physics in the atmospheric model. This work is novel because it is the first time that a particular physics option has been tested in a fully coupled climate model. Here, we demonstrate that this physics option has the ability to produce credible coupled climate simulations, with improved metrics in certain fields.
Donald D. Lucas, Matthew Simpson, Philip Cameron-Smith, and Ronald L. Baskett
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 13521–13543, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-13521-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-13521-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Monte Carlo ensemble simulations, Bayesian inversion, and machine learning are used to quantify uncertainty in the atmospheric transport and emissions of a controlled tracer released from a nuclear power plant. Uncertainty of different settings in a weather model and source terms in a dispersion model are jointly estimated. The algorithm is validated using model-generated output and field observations and can benefit atmospheric researchers who need to estimate tracer transport uncertainty.
Juno Hsu, Michael J. Prather, Philip Cameron-Smith, Alex Veidenbaum, and Alex Nicolau
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2525–2545, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2525-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2525-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Solar-J is a high-fidelity solar radiative transfer Fortran 90 code. It has been developed for consistently calculating both the photolysis rates of important chemical species and the heating rates of the atmosphere and the Earth's surface. Its spectral range spans from 177 nm to 12 microns. It can be easily dropped in as a module in global climate–chemistry models.
Raquel A. Silva, J. Jason West, Jean-François Lamarque, Drew T. Shindell, William J. Collins, Stig Dalsoren, Greg Faluvegi, Gerd Folberth, Larry W. Horowitz, Tatsuya Nagashima, Vaishali Naik, Steven T. Rumbold, Kengo Sudo, Toshihiko Takemura, Daniel Bergmann, Philip Cameron-Smith, Irene Cionni, Ruth M. Doherty, Veronika Eyring, Beatrice Josse, Ian A. MacKenzie, David Plummer, Mattia Righi, David S. Stevenson, Sarah Strode, Sophie Szopa, and Guang Zengast
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 9847–9862, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9847-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9847-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Using ozone and PM2.5 concentrations from the ACCMIP ensemble of chemistry-climate models for the four Representative Concentration Pathway scenarios (RCPs), together with projections of future population and baseline mortality rates, we quantify the human premature mortality impacts of future ambient air pollution in 2030, 2050 and 2100, relative to 2000 concentrations. We also estimate the global mortality burden of ozone and PM2.5 in 2000 and each future period.
K. Thayer-Calder, A. Gettelman, C. Craig, S. Goldhaber, P. A. Bogenschutz, C.-C. Chen, H. Morrison, J. Höft, E. Raut, B. M. Griffin, J. K. Weber, V. E. Larson, M. C. Wyant, M. Wang, Z. Guo, and S. J. Ghan
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3801–3821, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3801-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3801-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluates a unified cloud parameterization and a Monte Carlo microphysics interface that is implemented in CAM v5.3. We show mean climate and tropical variability results from global simulations. The model has a degradation in precipitation skill but improvements in shortwave cloud forcing, liquid water path, long-wave cloud forcing, precipitable water, and tropical wave simulation. We also show estimation of computational expense and sensitivity to number of subcolumns.
J. L. Schnell, M. J. Prather, B. Josse, V. Naik, L. W. Horowitz, P. Cameron-Smith, D. Bergmann, G. Zeng, D. A. Plummer, K. Sudo, T. Nagashima, D. T. Shindell, G. Faluvegi, and S. A. Strode
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 10581–10596, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-10581-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-10581-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
We test global chemistry--climate models in their ability to simulate present-day surface ozone. Models are tested against observed hourly ozone from 4217 stations in North America and Europe that are averaged over 1°x1° grid cells. Using novel metrics, we find most models match the shape but not the amplitude of regional summertime diurnal and annual cycles and match the pattern but not the magnitude of summer ozone enhancement. Most also match the observed distribution of extreme episode sizes
D. D. Lucas, C. Yver Kwok, P. Cameron-Smith, H. Graven, D. Bergmann, T. P. Guilderson, R. Weiss, and R. Keeling
Geosci. Instrum. Method. Data Syst., 4, 121–137, https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-4-121-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-4-121-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Multiobjective optimization is used to design Pareto optimal greenhouse gas (GHG) observing networks. A prototype GHG network is designed to optimize scientific performance and measurement costs. The Pareto frontier is convex, showing the trade-offs between performance and cost and the diminishing returns in trading one for the other. Other objectives and constraints that are important in the design of practical GHG monitoring networks can be incorporated into our method.
P. Hess, D. Kinnison, and Q. Tang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 2341–2365, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-2341-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-2341-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Using a series of model simulations, we find that at widespread NH extratropical locations, interannual tropospheric ozone variability is largely determined by the transport of ozone from the stratosphere. This has implications in the interpretation of measured tropospheric ozone variability in light of changes in the emissions of ozone precursors and in the response of tropospheric ozone to climate change.
R. Locatelli, P. Bousquet, F. Chevallier, A. Fortems-Cheney, S. Szopa, M. Saunois, A. Agusti-Panareda, D. Bergmann, H. Bian, P. Cameron-Smith, M. P. Chipperfield, E. Gloor, S. Houweling, S. R. Kawa, M. Krol, P. K. Patra, R. G. Prinn, M. Rigby, R. Saito, and C. Wilson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 9917–9937, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9917-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-9917-2013, 2013
J.-F. Lamarque, F. Dentener, J. McConnell, C.-U. Ro, M. Shaw, R. Vet, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, S. Dalsoren, R. Doherty, G. Faluvegi, S. J. Ghan, B. Josse, Y. H. Lee, I. A. MacKenzie, D. Plummer, D. T. Shindell, R. B. Skeie, D. S. Stevenson, S. Strode, G. Zeng, M. Curran, D. Dahl-Jensen, S. Das, D. Fritzsche, and M. Nolan
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 7997–8018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7997-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7997-2013, 2013
J.-F. Lamarque, D. T. Shindell, B. Josse, P. J. Young, I. Cionni, V. Eyring, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, W. J. Collins, R. Doherty, S. Dalsoren, G. Faluvegi, G. Folberth, S. J. Ghan, L. W. Horowitz, Y. H. Lee, I. A. MacKenzie, T. Nagashima, V. Naik, D. Plummer, M. Righi, S. T. Rumbold, M. Schulz, R. B. Skeie, D. S. Stevenson, S. Strode, K. Sudo, S. Szopa, A. Voulgarakis, and G. Zeng
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 179–206, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-179-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-179-2013, 2013
D. A. Belikov, S. Maksyutov, M. Krol, A. Fraser, M. Rigby, H. Bian, A. Agusti-Panareda, D. Bergmann, P. Bousquet, P. Cameron-Smith, M. P. Chipperfield, A. Fortems-Cheiney, E. Gloor, K. Haynes, P. Hess, S. Houweling, S. R. Kawa, R. M. Law, Z. Loh, L. Meng, P. I. Palmer, P. K. Patra, R. G. Prinn, R. Saito, and C. Wilson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1093–1114, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1093-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1093-2013, 2013
Ø. Hodnebrog, T. K. Berntsen, O. Dessens, M. Gauss, V. Grewe, I. S. A. Isaksen, B. Koffi, G. Myhre, D. Olivié, M. J. Prather, F. Stordal, S. Szopa, Q. Tang, P. van Velthoven, and J. E. Williams
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 12211–12225, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-12211-2012, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-12211-2012, 2012
Related subject area
Climate and Earth system modeling
Correction of sea surface biases in the NEMO ocean general circulation model using neural networks
Representing lateral groundwater flow from land to river in Earth system models
FINAM is not a model (v1.0): a new Python-based model coupling framework
The Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project (DAMIP v2.0) contribution to CMIP7
Enhancing winter climate simulations of the Great Lakes: insights from a new coupled lake–ice–atmosphere (CLIAv1) system on the importance of integrating 3D hydrodynamics with a regional climate model
Modelling emission and transport of key components of primary marine organic aerosol using the global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3
Assessing the climate impact of an improved volcanic sulfate aerosol representation in E3SM
Advanced climate model evaluation with ESMValTool v2.11.0 using parallel, out-of-core, and distributed computing
ICON-HAM-lite 1.0: simulating the Earth system with interactive aerosols at kilometer scales
Process-based modeling framework for sustainable irrigation management at the regional scale: integrating rice production, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions
Implementing deep soil and dynamic root uptake in Noah-MP (v4.5): impact on Amazon dry-season transpiration
Reducing time and computing costs in EC-Earth: an automatic load-balancing approach for coupled Earth system models
FLAME 1.0: a novel approach for modelling burned area in the Brazilian biomes using the maximum entropy concept
SURFER v3.0: a fast model with ice sheet tipping points and carbon cycle feedbacks for short- and long-term climate scenarios
NMH-CS 3.0: a C# programming language and Windows-system-based ecohydrological model derived from Noah-MP
A method for quantifying uncertainty in spatially interpolated meteorological data with application to daily maximum air temperature
Baseline Climate Variables for Earth System Modelling
PaleoSTeHM v1.0: a modern, scalable spatiotemporal hierarchical modeling framework for paleo-environmental data
The Tropical Basin Interaction Model Intercomparison Project (TBIMIP)
ZEMBA v1.0: an energy and moisture balance climate model to investigate Quaternary climate
Development and evaluation of a new 4DEnVar-based weakly coupled ocean data assimilation system in E3SMv2
TemDeep: a self-supervised framework for temporal downscaling of atmospheric fields at arbitrary time resolutions
The ensemble consistency test: from CESM to MPAS and beyond
An example of how data quality hinders progress: translating the latest findings on the regulation of leaf senescence timing in trees into the DP3 model (v1.0)
Presentation, calibration and testing of the DCESS II Earth system model of intermediate complexity (version 1.0)
Synthesizing global carbon–nitrogen coupling effects – the MAGICC coupled carbon–nitrogen cycle model v1.0
Historical trends and controlling factors of isoprene emissions in CMIP6 Earth system models
Investigating carbon and nitrogen conservation in reported CMIP6 Earth system model data
OpenBench: a land models evaluation system
From weather data to river runoff: using spatiotemporal convolutional networks for discharge forecasting
A Fortran–Python interface for integrating machine learning parameterization into earth system models
ROCKE-3D 2.0: An updated general circulation model for simulating the climates of rocky planets
A rapid-application emissions-to-impacts tool for scenario assessment: Probabilistic Regional Impacts from Model patterns and Emissions (PRIME)
The sensitivity of EC-Earth3 decadal predictions to the choice of volcanic forcing dataset: Insights for the next major eruption
A first calibration of the JULES-crop version 7.4 for rice using the novel O3-FACE experiment in China
The DOE E3SM version 2.1: overview and assessment of the impacts of parameterized ocean submesoscales
WRF-ELM v1.0: a regional climate model to study land–atmosphere interactions over heterogeneous land use regions
Modeling commercial-scale CO2 storage in the gas hydrate stability zone with PFLOTRAN v6.0
DiuSST: a conceptual model of diurnal warm layers for idealized atmospheric simulations with interactive sea surface temperature
High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project phase 2 (HighResMIP2) towards CMIP7
T&C-CROP: representing mechanistic crop growth with a terrestrial biosphere model (T&C, v1.5) – model formulation and validation
An updated non-intrusive, multi-scale, and flexible coupling interface in WRF 4.6.0
Monitoring and benchmarking Earth system model simulations with ESMValTool v2.12.0
The Earth Science Box Modeling Toolkit (ESBMTK 0.14.0.11): a Python library for research and teaching
CropSuite v1.0 – a comprehensive open-source crop suitability model considering climate variability for climate impact assessment
ICON ComIn – the ICON Community Interface (ComIn version 0.1.0, with ICON version 2024.01-01)
Using feature importance as an exploratory data analysis tool on Earth system models
A new metrics framework for quantifying and intercomparing atmospheric rivers in observations, reanalyses, and climate models
nextGEMS: entering the era of kilometer-scale Earth system modeling
The real challenges for climate and weather modelling on its way to sustained exascale performance: a case study using ICON (v2.6.6)
Andrea Storto, Sergey Frolov, Laura Slivinski, and Chunxue Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4789–4804, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4789-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4789-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Inaccuracies in air–sea heat fluxes severely degrade the accuracy of ocean numerical simulations. Here, we use artificial neural networks to correct air–sea heat fluxes as a function of oceanic and atmospheric state predictors. The correction successfully improves surface and subsurface ocean temperatures beyond the training period and in prediction experiments.
Chang Liao, L. Ruby Leung, Yilin Fang, Teklu Tesfa, and Robinson Negron-Juarez
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4601–4624, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4601-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4601-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding horizontal groundwater flow is important for understanding how water moves through the ground. Current climate models often simplify this process because they do not have information about the land surface that is detailed enough. Our study developed a new model that divides the land surface into hillslopes to better represent how groundwater flows. This model can help improve predictions of water availability and how it affects ecosystems.
Sebastian Müller, Martin Lange, Thomas Fischer, Sara König, Matthias Kelbling, Jeisson Javier Leal Rojas, and Stephan Thober
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4483–4498, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4483-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4483-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents FINAM (
FINAM is not a model), a new coupling framework written in Python to dynamically connect independently developed models. Python, as the ultimate glue language, enables the use of codes from nearly any programming language like Fortran, C++, Rust, and others. FINAM is designed to simplify the integration of various models with minimal effort, as demonstrated through various examples ranging from simple to complex systems.
Nathan P. Gillett, Isla R. Simpson, Gabi Hegerl, Reto Knutti, Dann Mitchell, Aurélien Ribes, Hideo Shiogama, Dáithí Stone, Claudia Tebaldi, Piotr Wolski, Wenxia Zhang, and Vivek K. Arora
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4399–4416, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Climate model simulations of the response to human and natural influences together, natural climate influences alone and greenhouse gases alone are key to quantifying human influence on the climate. The last set of such coordinated simulations underpinned key findings in the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. Here we propose a new set of such simulations to be used in the next generation of attribution studies and to underpin the next IPCC report.
Pengfei Xue, Chenfu Huang, Yafang Zhong, Michael Notaro, Miraj B. Kayastha, Xing Zhou, Chuyan Zhao, Christa Peters-Lidard, Carlos Cruz, and Eric Kemp
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4293–4316, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4293-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4293-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study introduces a new 3D lake–ice–atmosphere coupled model that significantly improves winter climate simulations for the Great Lakes compared to traditional 1D lake model coupling. The key contribution is the identification of critical hydrodynamic processes – ice transport, heat advection, and shear-driven turbulence production – that influence lake thermal structure and ice cover and explain the superior performance of 3D lake models to their 1D counterparts.
Anisbel Leon-Marcos, Moritz Zeising, Manuela van Pinxteren, Sebastian Zeppenfeld, Astrid Bracher, Elena Barbaro, Anja Engel, Matteo Feltracco, Ina Tegen, and Bernd Heinold
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4183–4213, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4183-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4183-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study represents the primary marine organic aerosol (PMOA) emissions, focusing on their sea–atmosphere transfer. Using the FESOM2.1–REcoM3 model, concentrations of key organic biomolecules were estimated and integrated into the ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 aerosol–climate model. Results highlight the influence of marine biological activity and surface winds on PMOA emissions, with reasonably good agreement with observations improving aerosol representation in the southern oceans.
Ziming Ke, Qi Tang, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Xiaohong Liu, and Hailong Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4137–4153, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4137-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4137-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses volcanic aerosol representation in E3SM (Energy Exascale Earth System Model), showing that an emission-based approach moderately improves temperature variability and cloud responses compared to a prescribed forcing approach, yet significant bias persists.
Manuel Schlund, Bouwe Andela, Jörg Benke, Ruth Comer, Birgit Hassler, Emma Hogan, Peter Kalverla, Axel Lauer, Bill Little, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, Francesco Nattino, Patrick Peglar, Valeriu Predoi, Stef Smeets, Stephen Worsley, Martin Yeo, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4009–4021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4009-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4009-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) is a community diagnostics and performance metrics tool for the evaluation of Earth system models. Here, we describe recent significant improvements of ESMValTool’s computational efficiency including parallel, out-of-core, and distributed computing. Evaluations with the enhanced version of ESMValTool are faster, use less computational resources, and can handle input data larger than the available memory.
Philipp Weiss, Ross Herbert, and Philip Stier
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3877–3894, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3877-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3877-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosols strongly influence Earth's climate as they interact with radiation and clouds. New Earth system models run at resolutions of a few kilometers. To simulate the Earth system with interactive aerosols, we developed a new aerosol module. It represents aerosols as an ensemble of lognormal modes with given sizes and compositions. We present a year-long simulation with four modes at a resolution of 5 km. It captures key processes like the formation of dust storms in the Sahara.
Yan Bo, Hao Liang, Tao Li, and Feng Zhou
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3799–3817, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3799-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3799-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study proposed an advancing framework for modeling regional rice production, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions. The framework integrated a process-based soil-crop model with vital physiological effects, a novel model upscaling method, and the NSGA-II multi-objective optimization algorithm at a parallel computing platform. The framework provides a valuable tool for multi-objective optimization of rice irrigation schemes at a large scale.
Carolina A. Bieri, Francina Dominguez, Gonzalo Miguez-Macho, and Ying Fan
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3755–3779, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3755-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3755-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Access to deep moisture below the Earth's surface is important for vegetation in areas of the Amazon where there is little precipitation for part of the year. Most existing numerical models of the Earth system do not adequately capture where and when deep root water uptake occurs. We address this by adding deep soil layers and a root water uptake feature to an existing model. Out modifications lead to increased dry-month transpiration and improved simulation of the annual transpiration cycle.
Sergi Palomas, Mario C. Acosta, Gladys Utrera, and Etienne Tourigny
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3661–3679, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3661-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3661-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present an automatic tool that optimizes resource distribution in coupled climate models, enhancing speed and reducing computational costs without requiring expert knowledge. Users can set energy/time criteria or limit resource usage. Tested on various European Community Earth System Model (EC-Earth) configurations and high-performance computing (HPC) platforms, it achieved up to 34 % faster simulations with fewer resources.
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.
Victor Couplet, Marina Martínez Montero, and Michel Crucifix
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3081–3129, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3081-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3081-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present SURFER v3.0, a simple climate model designed to estimate the impact of CO2 and CH4 emissions on global temperatures, sea levels, and ocean pH. We added new carbon cycle processes and calibrated the model to observations and results from more complex models, enabling use over timescales ranging from decades to millions of years. SURFER v3.0 is fast, transparent, and easy to use, making it an ideal tool for policy assessments and suitable for educational purposes.
Yong-He Liu and Zong-Liang Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3157–3174, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3157-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3157-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
NMH-CS 3.0 is a C#-based ecohydrological model reconstructed from the WRF-Hydro/Noah-MP model by translating the Fortran code of WRF-Hydro 3.0 and integrating a parallel river routing module. It enables efficient execution on multi-core personal computers. Simulations in the Yellow River basin demonstrate its consistency with WRF-Hydro outputs, providing a reliable alternative to the original Noah-MP model.
Conor T. Doherty, Weile Wang, Hirofumi Hashimoto, and Ian G. Brosnan
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3003–3016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3003-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3003-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present, analyze, and validate a methodology for quantifying uncertainty in gridded meteorological data products produced by spatial interpolation. In a validation case study using daily maximum near-surface air temperature (Tmax), the method works well and produces predictive distributions with closely matching theoretical versus actual coverage levels. Application of the method reveals that the magnitude of uncertainty in interpolated Tmax varies significantly in both space and time.
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.
Yucheng Lin, Robert E. Kopp, Alexander Reedy, Matteo Turilli, Shantenu Jha, and Erica L. Ashe
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2609–2637, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2609-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2609-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
PaleoSTeHM v1.0 is a state-of-the-art framework designed to reconstruct past environmental conditions using geological data. Built on modern machine learning techniques, it efficiently handles the sparse and noisy nature of paleo-records, allowing scientists to make accurate and scalable inferences about past environmental change. By using flexible statistical models, PaleoSTeHM separates different sources of uncertainty, improving the precision of historical climate reconstructions.
Ingo Richter, Ping Chang, Ping-Gin Chiu, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Takeshi Doi, Dietmar Dommenget, Guillaume Gastineau, Zoe E. Gillett, Aixue Hu, Takahito Kataoka, Noel S. Keenlyside, Fred Kucharski, Yuko M. Okumura, Wonsun Park, Malte F. Stuecker, Andréa S. Taschetto, Chunzai Wang, Stephen G. Yeager, and Sang-Wook Yeh
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2587–2608, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2587-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2587-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Tropical ocean basins influence each other through multiple pathways and mechanisms, referred to here as tropical basin interaction (TBI). Many researchers have examined TBI using comprehensive climate models but have obtained conflicting results. This may be partly due to differences in experiment protocols and partly due to systematic model errors. The Tropical Basin Interaction Model Intercomparison Project (TBIMIP) aims to address this problem by designing a set of TBI experiments that will be performed by multiple models.
Daniel F. J. Gunning, Kerim H. Nisancioglu, Emilie Capron, and Roderik S. W. van de Wal
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2479–2508, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2479-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2479-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This work documents the first results from ZEMBA: an energy balance model of the climate system. The model is a computationally efficient tool designed to study the response of climate to changes in the Earth's orbit. We demonstrate that ZEMBA reproduces many features of the Earth's climate for both the pre-industrial period and the Earth's most recent cold extreme – the Last Glacial Maximum. We intend to develop ZEMBA further and investigate the glacial cycles of the last 2.5 million years.
Pengfei Shi, L. Ruby Leung, and Bin Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2443–2460, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2443-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2443-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Improving climate predictions has significant socio-economic impacts. In this study, we develop and apply a new weakly coupled ocean data assimilation (WCODA) system to a coupled climate model. The WCODA system improves simulations of ocean temperature and salinity across many global regions. This system is meant to advance our understanding of the ocean's role in climate predictability.
Liwen Wang, Qian Li, Qi Lv, Xuan Peng, and Wei You
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2427–2442, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2427-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2427-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our research presents a novel deep learning approach called "TemDeep" for downscaling atmospheric variables at arbitrary time resolutions based on temporal coherence. Results show that our method can accurately recover evolution details superior to other methods, reaching 53.7 % in the restoration rate. Our findings are important for advancing weather forecasting models and enabling more precise and reliable predictions to support disaster preparedness, agriculture, and sustainable development.
Teo Price-Broncucia, Allison Baker, Dorit Hammerling, Michael Duda, and Rebecca Morrison
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2349–2372, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2349-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2349-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The ensemble consistency test (ECT) and its ultrafast variant (UF-ECT) have become powerful tools in the development community for the identification of unwanted changes in the Community Earth System Model (CESM). We develop a generalized setup framework to enable easy adoption of the ECT approach for other model developers and communities. This framework specifies test parameters to accurately characterize model variability and balance test sensitivity and computational cost.
Michael Meier, Christof Bigler, and Isabelle Chuine
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-460, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-460, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Formulated according to the leaf development process, the DP3 model of leaf coloring considerably contrasts previous models and allows to set up new hypotheses, e.g. on aging versus stress caused color changes. The DP3 model was as accurate as previous models and a comparison to the constant simulation of the mean date of leaf coloring indicated that noisy leaf coloring data forced the models to resort to this mean, which hinders model evaluation.
Esteban Fernández Villanueva and Gary Shaffer
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2161–2192, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2161-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2161-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We describe, calibrate and test the Danish Center for Earth System Science (DCESS) II model, a new, broad, adaptable and fast Earth system model. DCESS II is designed for global simulations over timescales of years to millions of years using limited computer resources like a personal computer. With its flexibility and comprehensive treatment of the global carbon cycle, DCESS II is a useful, computationally friendly tool for simulations of past climates as well as for future Earth system projections.
Gang Tang, Zebedee Nicholls, Alexander Norton, Sönke Zaehle, and Malte Meinshausen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2193–2230, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2193-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2193-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We studied carbon–nitrogen coupling in Earth system models by developing a global carbon–nitrogen cycle model (CNit v1.0) within the widely used emulator MAGICC. CNit effectively reproduced the global carbon–nitrogen cycle dynamics observed in complex models. Our results show persistent nitrogen limitations on plant growth (net primary production) from 1850 to 2100, suggesting that nitrogen deficiency may constrain future land carbon sequestration.
Ngoc Thi Nhu Do, Kengo Sudo, Akihiko Ito, Louisa K. Emmons, Vaishali Naik, Kostas Tsigaridis, Øyvind Seland, Gerd A. Folberth, and Douglas I. Kelley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2079–2109, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2079-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2079-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding historical isoprene emission changes is important for predicting future climate, but trends and their controlling factors remain uncertain. This study shows that long-term isoprene trends vary among Earth system models mainly due to partially incorporating CO2 effects and land cover changes rather than to climate. Future models that refine these factors’ effects on isoprene emissions, along with long-term observations, are essential for better understanding plant–climate interactions.
Gang Tang, Zebedee Nicholls, Chris Jones, Thomas Gasser, Alexander Norton, Tilo Ziehn, Alejandro Romero-Prieto, and Malte Meinshausen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2111–2136, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2111-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2111-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We analyzed carbon and nitrogen mass conservation in data from various Earth system models. Our findings reveal significant discrepancies between flux and pool size data, where cumulative imbalances can reach hundreds of gigatons of carbon or nitrogen. These imbalances appear primarily due to missing or inconsistently reported fluxes – especially for land-use and fire emissions. To enhance data quality, we recommend that future climate data protocols address this issue at the reporting stage.
Zhongwang Wei, Qingchen Xu, Fan Bai, Xionghui Xu, Zixin Wei, Wenzong Dong, Hongbin Liang, Nan Wei, Xingjie Lu, Lu Li, Shupeng Zhang, Hua Yuan, Laibo Liu, and Yongjiu Dai
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1380, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1380, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Land surface models are used for simulating earth's surface interacts with the atmosphere. As models grow more complex and detailed, researchers need better tools to evaluate their performance. OpenBench, a new software system that makes evaluation process more comprehensive and efficient. It stands out by incorporating various factors and working with data at any scale which enabling scientists to incorporate new types of models and measurements as our understanding of Earth’s systems evolves.
Florian Börgel, Sven Karsten, Karoline Rummel, and Ulf Gräwe
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2005–2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2005-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2005-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasting river runoff, which is crucial for managing water resources and understanding climate impacts, can be challenging. This study introduces a new method using convolutional long short-term memory (ConvLSTM) networks, a machine learning model that processes spatial and temporal data. Focusing on the Baltic Sea region, our model uses weather data as input to predict daily river runoff for 97 rivers.
Tao Zhang, Cyril Morcrette, Meng Zhang, Wuyin Lin, Shaocheng Xie, Ye Liu, Kwinten Van Weverberg, and Joana Rodrigues
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1917–1928, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1917-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1917-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models (ESMs) struggle with the uncertainties associated with parameterizing subgrid physics. Machine learning (ML) algorithms offer a solution by learning the important relationships and features from high-resolution models. To incorporate ML parameterizations into ESMs, we develop a Fortran–Python interface that allows for calling Python functions within Fortran-based ESMs. Through two case studies, this interface demonstrates its feasibility, modularity, and effectiveness.
Kostas Tsigaridis, Andrew S. Ackerman, Igor Aleinov, Mark A. Chandler, Thomas L. Clune, Christopher M. Colose, Anthony D. Del Genio, Maxwell Kelley, Nancy Y. Kiang, Anthony Leboissetier, Jan P. Perlwitz, Reto A. Ruedy, Gary L. Russell, Linda E. Sohl, Michael J. Way, and Eric T. Wolf
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-925, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-925, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present the second generation of ROCKE-3D, a generalized 3-dimensional model for use in Solar System and exoplanetary simulations of rocky planet climates. We quantify how the different component choices affect model results, and discuss strengths and limitations of using each component, together with how one can select which component to use. ROCKE-3D is publicly available and tutorial sessions are available for the community, greatly facilitating its use by any interested group.
Camilla Mathison, Eleanor J. Burke, Gregory Munday, Chris D. Jones, Chris J. Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Andy J. Wiltshire, Chris Huntingford, Eszter Kovacs, Laila K. Gohar, Rebecca M. Varney, and Douglas McNeall
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1785–1808, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present PRIME (Probabilistic Regional Impacts from Model patterns and Emissions), which is designed to take new emissions scenarios and rapidly provide regional impact information. PRIME allows large ensembles to be run on multi-centennial timescales, including the analysis of many important variables for impact assessments. Our evaluation shows that PRIME reproduces the climate response for known scenarios, providing confidence in using PRIME for novel scenarios.
Roberto Bilbao, Thomas J. Aubry, Matthew Toohey, and Pablo Ortega
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-609, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-609, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Large volcanic eruptions are unpredictable and can have significant climatic impacts. If one occurs, operational decadal forecasts will become invalid and must be rerun including the volcanic forcing. By analyzing the climate response in EC-Earth3 retrospective predictions, we show that idealised forcings produced with two simple models could be used in operational decadal forecasts to account for the radiative impacts of the next major volcanic eruption.
Beiyao Xu, Steven Dobbie, Huiyi Yang, Lianxin Yang, Yu Jiang, Andrew Challinor, Karina Williams, Yunxia Wang, and Tijian Wang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4077, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4077, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Ozone (O3) pollution harms rice production and threatens food security. To understand these impacts, we calibrated a crop model using unique data from experiments where rice was grown in open fields under controlled O3 exposure (free air). This is the first time such data has been used to improve a model’s ability to predict how rice responds to O3 pollution. Our work provides a more accurate tool to study O3’s effects and guide strategies to protect agriculture.
Katherine M. Smith, Alice M. Barthel, LeAnn M. Conlon, Luke P. Van Roekel, Anthony Bartoletti, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Chengzhu Zhang, Carolyn Branecky Begeman, James J. Benedict, Gautam Bisht, Yan Feng, Walter Hannah, Bryce E. Harrop, Nicole Jeffery, Wuyin Lin, Po-Lun Ma, Mathew E. Maltrud, Mark R. Petersen, Balwinder Singh, Qi Tang, Teklu Tesfa, Jonathan D. Wolfe, Shaocheng Xie, Xue Zheng, Karthik Balaguru, Oluwayemi Garuba, Peter Gleckler, Aixue Hu, Jiwoo Lee, Ben Moore-Maley, and Ana C. Ordoñez
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1613–1633, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1613-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1613-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Version 2.1 of the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) adds the Fox-Kemper et al. (2011) mixed-layer eddy parameterization, which restratifies the ocean surface layer through an overturning streamfunction. Results include surface layer bias reduction in temperature, salinity, and sea ice extent in the North Atlantic; a small strengthening of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation; and improvements to many atmospheric climatological variables.
Huilin Huang, Yun Qian, Gautam Bisht, Jiali Wang, Tirthankar Chakraborty, Dalei Hao, Jianfeng Li, Travis Thurber, Balwinder Singh, Zhao Yang, Ye Liu, Pengfei Xue, William J. Sacks, Ethan Coon, and Robert Hetland
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1427–1443, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1427-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1427-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We integrate the E3SM Land Model (ELM) with the WRF model through the Lightweight Infrastructure for Land Atmosphere Coupling (LILAC) Earth System Modeling Framework (ESMF). This framework includes a top-level driver, LILAC, for variable communication between WRF and ELM and ESMF caps for ELM initialization, execution, and finalization. The LILAC–ESMF framework maintains the integrity of the ELM's source code structure and facilitates the transfer of future ELM model developments to WRF-ELM.
Michael Nole, Jonah Bartrand, Fawz Naim, and Glenn Hammond
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1413–1425, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1413-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1413-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Safe carbon dioxide (CO2) storage is likely to be critical for mitigating some of the most severe effects of climate change. We present a simulation framework for modeling CO2 storage beneath the seafloor, where CO2 can form a solid. This can aid in permanent CO2 storage for long periods of time. Our models show what a commercial-scale CO2 injection would look like in a marine environment. We discuss what would need to be considered when designing a subsea CO2 injection.
Reyk Börner, Jan O. Haerter, and Romain Fiévet
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1333–1356, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1333-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1333-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The daily cycle of sea surface temperature (SST) impacts clouds above the ocean and could influence the clustering of thunderstorms linked to extreme rainfall and hurricanes. However, daily SST variability is often poorly represented in modeling studies of how clouds cluster. We present a simple, wind-responsive model of upper-ocean temperature for use in atmospheric simulations. Evaluating the model against observations, we show that it performs significantly better than common slab models.
Malcolm J. Roberts, Kevin A. Reed, Qing Bao, Joseph J. Barsugli, Suzana J. Camargo, Louis-Philippe Caron, Ping Chang, Cheng-Ta Chen, Hannah M. Christensen, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Ivy Frenger, Neven S. Fučkar, Shabeh ul Hasson, Helene T. Hewitt, Huanping Huang, Daehyun Kim, Chihiro Kodama, Michael Lai, Lai-Yung Ruby Leung, Ryo Mizuta, Paulo Nobre, Pablo Ortega, Dominique Paquin, Christopher D. Roberts, Enrico Scoccimarro, Jon Seddon, Anne Marie Treguier, Chia-Ying Tu, Paul A. Ullrich, Pier Luigi Vidale, Michael F. Wehner, Colin M. Zarzycki, Bosong Zhang, Wei Zhang, and Ming Zhao
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1307–1332, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1307-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1307-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
HighResMIP2 is a model intercomparison project focusing on high-resolution global climate models, that is, those with grid spacings of 25 km or less in the atmosphere and ocean, using simulations of decades to a century in length. We are proposing an update of our simulation protocol to make the models more applicable to key questions for climate variability and hazard in present-day and future projections and to build links with other communities to provide more robust climate information.
Jordi Buckley Paules, Simone Fatichi, Bonnie Warring, and Athanasios Paschalis
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1287–1305, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1287-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1287-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present and validate enhancements to the process-based T&C model aimed at improving its representation of crop growth and management practices. The updated model, T&C-CROP, enables applications such as analysing the hydrological and carbon storage impacts of land use transitions (e.g. conversions between crops, forests, and pastures) and optimizing irrigation and fertilization strategies in response to climate change.
Sébastien Masson, Swen Jullien, Eric Maisonnave, David Gill, Guillaume Samson, Mathieu Le Corre, and Lionel Renault
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1241–1263, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1241-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1241-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This article details a new feature we implemented in the popular regional atmospheric model WRF. This feature allows for data exchange between WRF and any other model (e.g. an ocean model) using the coupling library Ocean–Atmosphere–Sea–Ice–Soil Model Coupling Toolkit (OASIS3-MCT). This coupling interface is designed to be non-intrusive, flexible and modular. It also offers the possibility of taking into account the nested zooms used in WRF or in the models with which it is coupled.
Axel Lauer, Lisa Bock, Birgit Hassler, Patrick Jöckel, Lukas Ruhe, and Manuel Schlund
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1169–1188, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1169-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1169-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models are important tools to improve our understanding of current climate and to project climate change. Thus, it is crucial to understand possible shortcomings in the models. New features of the ESMValTool software package allow one to compare and visualize a model's performance with respect to reproducing observations in the context of other climate models in an easy and user-friendly way. We aim to help model developers assess and monitor climate simulations more efficiently.
Ulrich G. Wortmann, Tina Tsan, Mahrukh Niazi, Irene A. Ma, Ruben Navasardyan, Magnus-Roland Marun, Bernardo S. Chede, Jingwen Zhong, and Morgan Wolfe
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1155–1167, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1155-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1155-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth Science Box Modeling Toolkit (ESBMTK) is a user-friendly Python library that simplifies the creation of models to study earth system processes, such as the carbon cycle and ocean chemistry. It enhances learning by emphasizing concepts over programming and is accessible to students and researchers alike. By automating complex calculations and promoting code clarity, ESBMTK accelerates model development while improving reproducibility and the usability of scientific research.
Florian Zabel, Matthias Knüttel, and Benjamin Poschlod
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1067–1087, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1067-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1067-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
CropSuite is a new open-source crop suitability model. It provides a GUI and a wide range of options, including a spatial downscaling of climate data. We apply CropSuite to 48 staple and opportunity crops at a 1 km spatial resolution in Africa. We find that climate variability significantly impacts suitable areas but also affects optimal sowing dates and multiple cropping potential. The results provide valuable information for climate impact assessments, adaptation, and land-use planning.
Kerstin Hartung, Bastian Kern, Nils-Arne Dreier, Jörn Geisbüsch, Mahnoosh Haghighatnasab, Patrick Jöckel, Astrid Kerkweg, Wilton Jaciel Loch, Florian Prill, and Daniel Rieger
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1001–1015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1001-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1001-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The ICOsahedral Non-hydrostatic (ICON) model system Community Interface (ComIn) library supports connecting third-party modules to the ICON model. Third-party modules can range from simple diagnostic Python scripts to full chemistry models. ComIn offers a low barrier for code extensions to ICON, provides multi-language support (Fortran, C/C++, and Python), and reduces the migration effort in response to new ICON releases. This paper presents the ComIn design principles and a range of use cases.
Daniel Ries, Katherine Goode, Kellie McClernon, and Benjamin Hillman
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1041–1065, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1041-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1041-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Machine learning has advanced research in the climate science domain, but its models are difficult to understand. In order to understand the impacts and consequences of climate interventions such as stratospheric aerosol injection, complex models are often necessary. We use a case study to illustrate how we can understand the inner workings of a complex model. We present this technique as an exploratory tool that can be used to quickly discover and assess relationships in complex climate data.
Bo Dong, Paul Ullrich, Jiwoo Lee, Peter Gleckler, Kristin Chang, and Travis A. O'Brien
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 961–976, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-961-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-961-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
A metrics package designed for easy analysis of atmospheric river (AR) characteristics and statistics is presented. The tool is efficient for diagnosing systematic AR bias in climate models and useful for evaluating new AR characteristics in model simulations. In climate models, landfalling AR precipitation shows dry biases globally, and AR tracks are farther poleward (equatorward) in the North and South Atlantic (South Pacific and Indian Ocean).
Hans Segura, Xabier Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Philipp Weiss, Sebastian K. Müller, Thomas Rackow, Junhong Lee, Edgar Dolores-Tesillos, Imme Benedict, Matthias Aengenheyster, Razvan Aguridan, Gabriele Arduini, Alexander J. Baker, Jiawei Bao, Swantje Bastin, Eulàlia Baulenas, Tobias Becker, Sebastian Beyer, Hendryk Bockelmann, Nils Brüggemann, Lukas Brunner, Suvarchal K. Cheedela, Sushant Das, Jasper Denissen, Ian Dragaud, Piotr Dziekan, Madeleine Ekblom, Jan Frederik Engels, Monika Esch, Richard Forbes, Claudia Frauen, Lilli Freischem, Diego García-Maroto, Philipp Geier, Paul Gierz, Álvaro González-Cervera, Katherine Grayson, Matthew Griffith, Oliver Gutjahr, Helmuth Haak, Ioan Hadade, Kerstin Haslehner, Shabeh ul Hasson, Jan Hegewald, Lukas Kluft, Aleksei Koldunov, Nikolay Koldunov, Tobias Kölling, Shunya Koseki, Sergey Kosukhin, Josh Kousal, Peter Kuma, Arjun U. Kumar, Rumeng Li, Nicolas Maury, Maximilian Meindl, Sebastian Milinski, Kristian Mogensen, Bimochan Niraula, Jakub Nowak, Divya Sri Praturi, Ulrike Proske, Dian Putrasahan, René Redler, David Santuy, Domokos Sármány, Reiner Schnur, Patrick Scholz, Dmitry Sidorenko, Dorian Spät, Birgit Sützl, Daisuke Takasuka, Adrian Tompkins, Alejandro Uribe, Mirco Valentini, Menno Veerman, Aiko Voigt, Sarah Warnau, Fabian Wachsmann, Marta Wacławczyk, Nils Wedi, Karl-Hermann Wieners, Jonathan Wille, Marius Winkler, Yuting Wu, Florian Ziemen, Janos Zimmermann, Frida A.-M. Bender, Dragana Bojovic, Sandrine Bony, Simona Bordoni, Patrice Brehmer, Marcus Dengler, Emanuel Dutra, Saliou Faye, Erich Fischer, Chiel van Heerwaarden, Cathy Hohenegger, Heikki Järvinen, Markus Jochum, Thomas Jung, Johann H. Jungclaus, Noel S. Keenlyside, Daniel Klocke, Heike Konow, Martina Klose, Szymon Malinowski, Olivia Martius, Thorsten Mauritsen, Juan Pedro Mellado, Theresa Mieslinger, Elsa Mohino, Hanna Pawłowska, Karsten Peters-von Gehlen, Abdoulaye Sarré, Pajam Sobhani, Philip Stier, Lauri Tuppi, Pier Luigi Vidale, Irina Sandu, and Bjorn Stevens
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-509, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-509, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The nextGEMS project developed two Earth system models that resolve processes of the order of 10 km, giving more fidelity to the representation of local phenomena, globally. In its fourth cycle, nextGEMS performed simulations with coupled ocean, land, and atmosphere over the 2020–2049 period under the SSP3-7.0 scenario. Here, we provide an overview of nextGEMS, insights into the model development, and the realism of multi-decadal, kilometer-scale simulations.
Panagiotis Adamidis, Erik Pfister, Hendryk Bockelmann, Dominik Zobel, Jens-Olaf Beismann, and Marek Jacob
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 905–919, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-905-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-905-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we investigated performance indicators of the climate model ICON (ICOsahedral Nonhydrostatic) on different compute architectures to answer the question of how to generate high-resolution climate simulations. Evidently, it is not enough to use more computing units of the conventionally used architectures; higher memory throughput is the most promising approach. More potential can be gained from single-node optimization rather than simply increasing the number of compute nodes.
Cited articles
Abiodun, B. J., Prusa, J. M., and Gutowski, W. J.: Implementation of a non-hydrostatic, adaptive-grid dynamics core in CAM3. Part I: comparison of dynamics cores in aqua-planet simulations, Clim. Dynam., 31, 795–810, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-008-0381-y, 2008. a
Adams, D. K. and Comrie, A. C.: The North American Monsoon, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 78, 2197–2213, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1997)078<2197:Tnam>2.0.Co;2, 1997. a, b
Arellano-Gonzalez, J., AghaKouchak, A., Levy, M. C., Qin, Y., Burney, J., Davis, S. J., and Moore, F. C.: The adaptive benefits of agricultural water markets in California, Environ. Res. Lett., 16, 044036, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abde5b, 2021. a
Bales, R. C., Battles, J. J., Chen, Y., Conklin, M. H., Holst, E., O’Hara, K. L., Saksa, P., and Stewart, W.: Forests and water in the Sierra Nevada: Sierra Nevada watershed ecosystem enhancement project, Sierra Nevada Research Institute report, Vol. 11, https://forests.berkeley.edu/sites/forests.berkeley.edu/files/146199.pdf (last access: 29 April 2024), 2011. a, b
Bales, R. C., Rice, R., and Roy, S. B.: Estimated loss of snowpack storage in the Eastern Sierra Nevada with climate warming, Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 141, 04014055, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000453, 2015. a
Ban, N., Schmidli, J., and Schär, C.: Evaluation of the convection-resolving regional climate modeling approach in decade-long simulations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 7889–7907, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014jd021478, 2014. a
Barthelmie, R. and Pryor, S. C.: Potential contribution of wind energy to climate change mitigation, Nat. Clim. Change, 4, 684–688, 2014. a
Bartos, M. D. and Chester, M. V.: Impacts of climate change on electric power supply in the Western United States, Nat. Clim. Change, 5, 748–752, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2648, 2015. a, b
Belmecheri, S., Babst, F., Wahl, E. R., Stahle, D. W., and Trouet, V.: Multi-century evaluation of Sierra Nevada snowpack, Nat. Clim. Change, 6, 2–3, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2809, 2015. a
Berg, N., Walton, D. B., Schwartz, M., Hall, A., and Sun, F.: Twenty-First-Century Snowfall and Snowpack Changes over the Southern California Mountains, J. Climate, 29, 91–110, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-15-0199.1, 2016. a, b, c
Bogenschutz, P., Zhang, J., Tang, Q., and Cameron-Smith, P.: Atmospheric River Induced Precipitation in California as Simulated by the Regionally Refined Simple Convection Resolving E3SM Atmosphere Model (SCREAM) Version 0, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-839, 2024. a, b, c, d, e, f, g
Bogenschutz, P. A. and Krueger, S. K.: A simplified PDF parameterization of subgrid‐scale clouds and turbulence for cloud‐resolving models, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 5, 195–211, https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20018, 2013. a
Bogenschutz, P. A., Yamaguchi, T., and Lee, H. H.: The Energy Exascale Earth System Model Simulations With High Vertical Resolution in the Lower Troposphere, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2020MS002239, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002239, 2021. a
Bogenschutz, P. A., Lee, H.-H., Tang, Q., and Yamaguchi, T.: Combining regional mesh refinement with vertically enhanced physics to target marine stratocumulus biases as demonstrated in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 335–352, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-335-2023, 2023a. a, b, c, d
Bogenschutz, P. A., Eldred, C., and Caldwell, P. M.: Horizontal Resolution Sensitivity of the Simple Convection‐Permitting E3SM Atmosphere Model in a Doubly‐Periodic Configuration, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2022MS003466, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ms003466, 2023b. a
Bogenschutz, P., Zhang, J., Tang, Q., and Cameron-Smith, P.: Atmospheric River Induced Precipitation in California as Simulated by the Regionally Refined Simple Convection Resolving E3SM Atmosphere Model (SCREAM) Version 0, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-839, 2024.
Broxton, P., Zeng, X., and Dawson., N.: Daily 4 km Gridded SWE and Snow Depth from Assimilated In-Situ and Modeled Data over the Conterminous US, National Snow and Ice Data Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/0GGPB220EX6A, 2019. a
Bryan, G. H., Wyngaard, J. C., and Fritsch, J. M.: Resolution requirements for the simulation of deep moist convection, Mon. Weather Rev., 131, 2394–2416, 2003. a
Caldwell, P., Chin, H. N. S., Bader, D. C., and Bala, G.: Evaluation of a WRF dynamical downscaling simulation over California, Climatic Change, 95, 499–521, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-009-9583-5, 2009. a
Caldwell, P. M., Mametjanov, A., Tang, Q., Van Roekel, L. P., Golaz, J. C., Lin, W. Y., Bader, D. C., Keen, N. D., Feng, Y., Jacob, R., Maltrud, M. E., Roberts, A. F., Taylor, M. A., Veneziani, M., Wang, H. L., Wolfe, J. D., Balaguru, K., Cameron-Smith, P., Dong, L., Klein, S. A., Leung, L. R., Li, H. Y., Li, Q., Liu, X. H., Neale, R. B., Pinheiro, M., Qian, Y., Ullrich, P. A., Xie, S. C., Yang, Y., Zhang, Y. Y., Zhang, K., and Zhou, T.: The DOE E3SM Coupled Model Version 1: Description and Results at High Resolution, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 4095–4146, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019ms001870, 2019. a
Caldwell, P. M., Terai, C. R., Hillman, B., Keen, N. D., Bogenschutz, P., Lin, W., Beydoun, H., Taylor, M., Bertagna, L., Bradley, A. M., Clevenger, T. C., Donahue, A. S., Eldred, C., Foucar, J., Golaz, J. C., Guba, O., Jacob, R., Johnson, J., Krishna, J., Liu, W., Pressel, K., Salinger, A. G., Singh, B., Steyer, A., Ullrich, P., Wu, D., Yuan, X., Shpund, J., Ma, H. Y., and Zender, C. S.: Convection‐Permitting Simulations With the E3SM Global Atmosphere Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2021MS002544, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021ms002544, 2021. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k
California Department of Food and Agriculture: California agricultural statistics review 2016–2017, https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Statistics/PDFs/2016-17AgReport.pdf (last access: 29 April 2024), 2016. a
Cayan, D. R.: Interannual Climate Variability and Snowpack in the Western United States, J. Climate, 9, 928–948, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1996)009<0928:Icvasi>2.0.Co;2, 1996. a
Chan, S. C., Kendon, E. J., Fowler, H. J., Blenkinsop, S., Ferro, C. A. T., and Stephenson, D. B.: Does increasing the spatial resolution of a regional climate model improve the simulated daily precipitation?, Clim. Dynam., 41, 1475–1495, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1568-9, 2012. a
Chen, X., Leung, L. R., Gao, Y., Liu, Y., Wigmosta, M., and Richmond, M.: Predictability of extreme precipitation in western US watersheds based on atmospheric river occurrence, intensity, and duration, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 11693–11701, 2018. a
Chikira, M. and Sugiyama, M.: A Cumulus Parameterization with State-Dependent Entrainment Rate. Part I: Description and Sensitivity to Temperature and Humidity Profiles, J. Atmos. Sci., 67, 2171–2193, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010jas3316.1, 2010. a
Crook, J. A., Jones, L. A., Forster, P. M., and Crook, R.: Climate change impacts on future photovoltaic and concentrated solar power energy output, Energy Environmental Science, 4, 3101–3109, https://doi.org/10.1039/c1ee01495a, 2011. a
Davini, P. and D’Andrea, F.: From CMIP3 to CMIP6: Northern Hemisphere Atmospheric Blocking Simulation in Present and Future Climate, J. Climate, 33, 10021–10038, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-19-0862.1, 2020. a
Dettinger, M.: Historical and future relations between large storms and droughts in California, San Francisco estuary and watershed science, San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, Vol. 14, https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2016v14iss2art1, 2016. a
Dettinger, M. D., Cayan, D. R., Diaz, H. F., and Meko, D. M.: North–south precipitation patterns in western North America on interannual-to-decadal timescales, J. Climate, 11, 3095–3111, 1998. a
Dettinger, M. D., Ralph, F. M., Das, T., Neiman, P. J., and Cayan, D. R.: Atmospheric Rivers, Floods and the Water Resources of California, Water, 3, 445–478, https://doi.org/10.3390/w3020445, 2011. a, b, c
Dong, L., Leung, L. R., Lu, J., and Gao, Y.: Contributions of Extreme and Non‐Extreme Precipitation to California Precipitation Seasonality Changes Under Warming, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 13470–13478, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019gl084225, 2019. a
Edenhofer, O., Pichs-Madruga, R., Sokona, Y., Seyboth, K., Kadner, S., Zwickel, T., Eickemeier, P., Hansen, G., Schlömer, S., and von Stechow, C.: Renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation: Special report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 1139505599, 2011. a
Engstrom, W. N.: The California storm of January 1862, Quaternary Res., 46, 141–148, 1996. a
Fang, Y., Liu, Y., and Margulis, S.: Western United States UCLA Daily Snow Reanalysis, Version 1. [WUS-SR], Boulder, Colorado USA, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/PP7T2GBI52I2, 2022a. a
Fang, Y., Liu, Y., and Margulis, S. A.: A western United States snow reanalysis dataset over the Landsat era from water years 1985 to 2021, Sci. Data, 9, 677, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01768-7, 2022b. a
Fox-Rabinovitz, M., Cote, J., Dugas, B., Deque, M., and McGregor, J. L.: Variable resolution general circulation models: Stretched-grid model intercomparison project (SGMIP), J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D16104, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005jd006520, 2006. a
Gao, Z., Zhao, C., Yan, X., Guo, Y., Liu, S., Luo, N., Song, S., and Zhao, Z.: Effects of cumulus and radiation parameterization on summer surface air temperature over eastern China, Clim. Dynam., 61, 559–577, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-022-06601-w, 2022. a
Gao, Z., Yan, X., Dong, S., Luo, N., and Song, S.: Object-based evaluation of rainfall forecasts over eastern China by eight cumulus parameterization schemes in the WRF model, Atmos. Res., 284, 106618, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2023.106618, 2023. a
Gershunov, A., Cayan, D. R., and Iacobellis, S. F.: The great 2006 heat wave over California and Nevada: Signal of an increasing trend, J. Climate, 22, 6181–6203, 2009. a
Gleick, P. H. and Chalecki, E. L.: The impacts of climatic changes for water resources of the Colorado and Sacramento‐San Joaquin river basins, J. Am. Water Resour. As., 35, 1429–1441, 1999. a
Golaz, J. C., Caldwell, P. M., Van Roekel, L. P., Petersen, M. R., Tang, Q., Wolfe, J. D., Abeshu, G., Anantharaj, V., Asay-Davis, X. S., Bader, D. C., Baldwin, S. A., Bisht, G., Bogenschutz, P. A., Branstetter, M., Brunke, M. A., Brus, S. R., Burrows, S. M., Cameron-Smith, P. J., Donahue, A. S., Deakin, M., Easter, R. C., Evans, K. J., Feng, Y., Flanner, M., Foucar, J. G., Fyke, J. G., Griffin, B. M., Hannay, C., Harrop, B. E., Hoffman, M. J., Hunke, E. C., Jacob, R. L., Jacobsen, D. W., Jeffery, N., Jones, P. W., Keen, N. D., Klein, S. A., Larson, V. E., Leung, L. R., Li, H. Y., Lin, W. Y., Lipscomb, W. H., Ma, P. L., Mahajan, S., Maltrud, M. E., Mametjanov, A., McClean, J. L., McCoy, R. B., Neale, R. B., Price, S. F., Qian, Y., Rasch, P. J., Eyre, J. E. J. R., Riley, W. J., Ringler, T. D., Roberts, A. F., Roesler, E. L., Salinger, A. G., Shaheen, Z., Shi, X. Y., Singh, B., Tang, J. Y., Taylor, M. A., Thornton, P. E., Turner, A. K., Veneziani, M., Wan, H., Wang, H. L., Wang, S. L., Williams, D. N., Wolfram, P. J., Worley, P. H., Xie, S. C., Yang, Y., Yoon, J. H., Zelinka, M. D., Zender, C. S., Zeng, X. B., Zhang, C. Z., Zhang, K., Zhang, Y., Zheng, X., Zhou, T., and Zhu, Q.: The DOE E3SM Coupled Model Version 1: Overview and Evaluation at Standard Resolution, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 2089–2129, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018ms001603, 2019. a, b, c, d, e
Goss, M., Swain, D. L., Abatzoglou, J. T., Sarhadi, A., Kolden, C. A., Williams, A. P., and Diffenbaugh, N. S.: Climate change is increasing the likelihood of extreme autumn wildfire conditions across California, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 094016, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab83a7, 2020. a
Griffiths, P. G., Magirl, C. S., Webb, R. H., Pytlak, E., Troch, P. A., and Lyon, S. W.: Spatial distribution and frequency of precipitation during an extreme event: July 2006 mesoscale convective complexes and floods in southeastern Arizona, Water Resour. Res., 45, W07419, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008wr007380, 2009. a
Guba, O., Taylor, M. A., Ullrich, P. A., Overfelt, J. R., and Levy, M. N.: The spectral element method (SEM) on variable-resolution grids: evaluating grid sensitivity and resolution-aware numerical viscosity, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2803–2816, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2803-2014, 2014. a
Guo, D., Yu, E., and Wang, H.: Will the Tibetan Plateau warming depend on elevation in the future?, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 3969–3978, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024871, 2016. a
Gutowski, W. J., Ullrich, P. A., Hall, A., Leung, L. R., O'Brien, T. A., Patricola, C. M., Arritt, R. W., Bukovsky, M. S., Calvin, K. V., Feng, Z., Jones, A. D., Kooperman, G. J., Monier, E., Pritchard, M. S., Pryor, S. C., Qian, Y., Rhoades, A. M., Roberts, A. F., Sakaguchi, K., Urban, N., and Zarzycki, C.: The Ongoing Need for High-Resolution Regional Climate Models: Process Understanding and Stakeholder Information, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 101, E664–E683, https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-19-0113.1, 2020. a, b
Hall, A., Schwartz, M., Sun, F., Walton, D., and Berg, N.: Significant and Inevitable End-of-Twenty-First-Century Advances in Surface Runoff Timing in California’s Sierra Nevada, J. Hydrometeorol., 18, 3181–3197, https://doi.org/10.1175/jhm-d-16-0257.1, 2017. a
Hanak, E. and Lund, J. R.: Adapting California’s water management to climate change, Climatic Change, 111, 17–44, 2012. a
Hanak, E., Chappelle, C., Escriva-Bou, A., Gray, B., Jezdimirovic, J., McCann, H., and Mount, J.: Priorities for California’s water, Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) Water Policy Center, 1–19, https://www.ppic.org/publication/californias-water/ (last access: 29 April 2024), 2017. a
Hannah, W. M., Bradley, A. M., Guba, O., Tang, Q., Golaz, J. C., and Wolfe, J.: Separating Physics and Dynamics Grids for Improved Computational Efficiency in Spectral Element Earth System Models, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2020MS002419, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002419, 2021. a
Harris, L. M. and Lin, S.-J.: A Two-Way Nested Global-Regional Dynamical Core on the Cubed-Sphere Grid, Mon. Weather Rev., 141, 283–306, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00201.1, 2013. a
Harris, L. M., Lin, S.-J., and Tu, C.: High-Resolution Climate Simulations Using GFDL HiRAM with a Stretched Global Grid, J. Climate, 29, 4293–4314, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0389.1, 2016. a
Harrison, D. E. and Larkin, N. K.: Seasonal U.S. temperature and precipitation anomalies associated with El Niño: Historical results and comparison with 1997–98, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 3959–3962, https://doi.org/10.1029/1998GL900061, 1998. a
Hayhoe, K., Cayan, D., Field, C. B., Frumhoff, P. C., Maurer, E. P., Miller, N. L., Moser, S. C., Schneider, S. H., Cahill, K. N., Cleland, E. E., Dale, L., Drapek, R., Hanemann, R. M., Kalkstein, L. S., Lenihan, J., Lunch, C. K., Neilson, R. P., Sheridan, S. C., and Verville, J. H.: Emissions pathways, climate change, and impacts on California, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 101, 12422–12427, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0404500101, 2004. a, b, c
Higgins, R. W., Chen, Y., and Douglas, A. V.: Interannual Variability of the North American Warm Season Precipitation Regime, J. Climate, 12, 653–680, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1999)012<0653:Ivotna>2.0.Co;2, 1999. a, b
Hill, D. F., Burakowski, E. A., Crumley, R. L., Keon, J., Hu, J. M., Arendt, A. A., Wikstrom Jones, K., and Wolken, G. J.: Converting snow depth to snow water equivalent using climatological variables, The Cryosphere, 13, 1767–1784, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-1767-2019, 2019. a
Hoell, A., Hoerling, M., Eischeid, J., Wolter, K., Dole, R., Perlwitz, J., Xu, T., and Cheng, L.: Does El Niño intensity matter for California precipitation?, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 819–825, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015gl067102, 2016. a
Hohenegger, C., Brockhaus, P., and Schar, C.: Towards climate simulations at cloud-resolving scales, Meteorol. Z., 17, 383–394, https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2008/0303, 2008. a
Hohenegger, C., Korn, P., Linardakis, L., Redler, R., Schnur, R., Adamidis, P., Bao, J., Bastin, S., Behravesh, M., Bergemann, M., Biercamp, J., Bockelmann, H., Brokopf, R., Brüggemann, N., Casaroli, L., Chegini, F., Datseris, G., Esch, M., George, G., Giorgetta, M., Gutjahr, O., Haak, H., Hanke, M., Ilyina, T., Jahns, T., Jungclaus, J., Kern, M., Klocke, D., Kluft, L., Kölling, T., Kornblueh, L., Kosukhin, S., Kroll, C., Lee, J., Mauritsen, T., Mehlmann, C., Mieslinger, T., Naumann, A. K., Paccini, L., Peinado, A., Praturi, D. S., Putrasahan, D., Rast, S., Riddick, T., Roeber, N., Schmidt, H., Schulzweida, U., Schütte, F., Segura, H., Shevchenko, R., Singh, V., Specht, M., Stephan, C. C., von Storch, J.-S., Vogel, R., Wengel, C., Winkler, M., Ziemen, F., Marotzke, J., and Stevens, B.: ICON-Sapphire: simulating the components of the Earth system and their interactions at kilometer and subkilometer scales, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 779–811, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-779-2023, 2023. a
Holden, Z. A., Swanson, A., Luce, C. H., Jolly, W. M., Maneta, M., Oyler, J. W., Warren, D. A., Parsons, R., and Affleck, D.: Decreasing fire season precipitation increased recent western US forest wildfire activity, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 115, E8349–E8357, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1802316115, 2018. a, b
Huang, X. and Swain, D. L.: Climate change is increasing the risk of a California megaflood, Sci. Adv., 8, eabq0995, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abq0995, 2022. a, b, c, d
Huang, X. and Ullrich, P. A.: The Changing Character of Twenty-First-Century Precipitation over the Western United States in the Variable-Resolution CESM, J. Climate, 30, 7555–7575, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0673.1, 2017. a
Huang, X., Swain, D. L., Walton, D. B., Stevenson, S., and Hall, A. D.: Simulating and Evaluating Atmospheric River‐Induced Precipitation Extremes Along the U.S. Pacific Coast: Case Studies From 1980–2017, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2019JD031554, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019jd031554, 2020. a, b, c, d, e
Hunke, E., Lipscomb, W., Turner, A., Jeffery, N., and Elliott, S.: CICE: The Los Alamos sea ice model, documentation and software, Report, version 4.0, Tech. Rep. LA-CC-06-012, Los Alamos National Laboratory, https://svn-ccsm-models.cgd.ucar.edu/cesm1/alphas/branches/cesm1_5_alpha04c_timers/components/cice/src/doc/cicedoc.pdf, (last access: 29 April 2024), 2008. a, b
Jana, S., Rajagopalan, B., Alexander, M. A., and Ray, A. J.: Understanding the Dominant Sources and Tracks of Moisture for Summer Rainfall in the Southwest United States, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 4850–4870, https://doi.org/10.1029/2017jd027652, 2018. a
Jin, L., Li, Z., He, Q., Miao, Q., Zhang, H., and Yang, X.: Observation and simulation of near-surface wind and its variation with topography in Urumqi, West China, J. Meteorol. Res.-PRC, 30, 961–982, 2016. a
Johnson, B. O. and Delworth, T. L.: The Role of the Gulf of California in the North American Monsoon, J. Climate, 36, 1541–1559, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-22-0365.1, 2023. a
Johnstone, J. A. and Dawson, T. E.: Climatic context and ecological implications of summer fog decline in the coast redwood region, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 4533–4538, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0915062107, 2010. a
Junquas, C., Takahashi, K., Condom, T., Espinoza, J.-C., Chávez, S., Sicart, J.-E., and Lebel, T.: Understanding the influence of orography on the precipitation diurnal cycle and the associated atmospheric processes in the central Andes, Clim. Dynam., 50, 3995–4017, 2018. a
Karnauskas, K. B. and Ummenhofer, C. C.: On the dynamics of the Hadley circulation and subtropical drying, Clim. Dynam., 42, 2259–2269, 2014. a
Keeley, J. E., Safford, H., Fotheringham, C., Franklin, J., and Moritz, M.: The 2007 southern California wildfires: lessons in complexity, J. Forest., 107, 287–296, 2009. a
Kendon, E. J., Roberts, N. M., Senior, C. A., and Roberts, M. J.: Realism of Rainfall in a Very High-Resolution Regional Climate Model, J. Climate, 25, 5791–5806, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-11-00562.1, 2012. a
Kendon, E. J., Ban, N., Roberts, N. M., Fowler, H. J., Roberts, M. J., Chan, S. C., Evans, J. P., Fosser, G., and Wilkinson, J. M.: Do Convection-Permitting Regional Climate Models Improve Projections of Future Precipitation Change?, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 79–93, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-15-0004.1, 2017. a
Koračin, D., Lewis, J., Thompson, W. T., Dorman, C. E., and Businger, J. A.: Transition of Stratus into Fog along the California Coast: Observations and Modeling, J. Atmos. Sci., 58, 1714–1731, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2001)058<1714:TOSIFA>2.0.CO;2, 2001. a
Kriegler, E., Bauer, N., Popp, A., Humpenöder, F., Leimbach, M., Strefler, J., Baumstark, L., Bodirsky, B. L., Hilaire, J., Klein, D., Mouratiadou, I., Weindl, I., Bertram, C., Dietrich, J.-P., Luderer, G., Pehl, M., Pietzcker, R., Piontek, F., Lotze-Campen, H., Biewald, A., Bonsch, M., Giannousakis, A., Kreidenweis, U., Müller, C., Rolinski, S., Schultes, A., Schwanitz, J., Stevanovic, M., Calvin, K., Emmerling, J., Fujimori, S., and Edenhofer, O.: Fossil-fueled development (SSP5): An energy and resource intensive scenario for the 21st century, Global Environ. Chang., 42, 297–315, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.015, 2017. a
Langhans, W., Schmidli, J., and Schär, C.: Mesoscale Impacts of Explicit Numerical Diffusion in a Convection-Permitting Model, Mon. Weather Rev., 140, 226–244, https://doi.org/10.1175/2011mwr3650.1, 2012. a
Laprise, R., Varma, M. R., Denis, B., Caya, D., and Zawadzki, I.: Predictability of a nested limited-area model, Mon. Weather Rev., 128, 4149–4154, 2000. a
Lauritzen, P. H., Bacmeister, J. T., Callaghan, P. F., and Taylor, M. A.: NCAR_Topo (v1.0): NCAR global model topography generation software for unstructured grids, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3975–3986, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3975-2015, 2015. a
Lee, H., Bogenschutz, P., and Yamaguchi, T.: Resolving Away Stratocumulus Biases in Modern Global Climate Models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 49, e2022GL099422, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022gl099422, 2022. a, b
Leung, L. R. and Qian, Y.: Atmospheric rivers induced heavy precipitation and flooding in the western US simulated by the WRF regional climate model, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L03820, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL036445, 2009. a
Leung, L. R., Qian, Y., Bian, X., Washington, W. M., Han, J., and Roads, J. O.: Mid-century ensemble regional climate change scenarios for the western United States, Climatic Change, 62, 75–113, 2004. a
Lewis, J.: Sea fog off the California coast: Viewed in the context of transient weather systems, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4457, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002jd002833, 2003. a
Li, H., Wigmosta, M. S., Wu, H., Huang, M., Ke, Y., Coleman, A. M., and Leung, L. R.: A Physically Based Runoff Routing Model for Land Surface and Earth System Models, J. Hydrometeorol., 14, 808–828, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-12-015.1, 2013. a
Liu, W., Ullrich, P. A., Guba, O., Caldwell, P. M., and Keen, N. D.: An Assessment of Nonhydrostatic and Hydrostatic Dynamical Cores at Seasonal Time Scales in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM), J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002805, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002805, 2022. a
Liu, W., Ullrich, P. A., Li, J., Zarzycki, C., Caldwell, P. M., Leung, L. R., and Qian, Y.: The June 2012 North American Derecho: A Testbed for Evaluating Regional and Global Climate Modeling Systems at Cloud‐Resolving Scales, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2022MS003358, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ms003358, 2023. a
Lucas-Picher, P., Argüeso, D., Brisson, E., Tramblay, Y., Berg, P., Lemonsu, A., Kotlarski, S., and Caillaud, C.: Convection-permitting modeling with regional climate models: Latest developments and next steps, WIREs Climate Change, 12, e731, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.731, 2021.
Luković, J., Chiang, J. C. H., Blagojević, D., and Sekulić, A.: A Later Onset of the Rainy Season in California, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2020GL090350, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020gl090350, 2021.
Lundquist, J., Hughes, M., Gutmann, E., and Kapnick, S.: Our Skill in Modeling Mountain Rain and Snow is Bypassing the Skill of Our Observational Networks, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 100, 2473–2490, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-19-0001.1, 2019. a, b
Ma, H. Y., Chuang, C. C., Klein, S. A., Lo, M. H., Zhang, Y., Xie, S., Zheng, X., Ma, P. L., Zhang, Y., and Phillips, T. J.: An improved hindcast approach for evaluation and diagnosis of physical processes in global climate models, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 7, 1810–1827, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015ms000490, 2015. a
Mahajan, S., Tang, Q., Keen, N. D., Golaz, J.-C., and van Roekel, L. P.: Simulation of ENSO Teleconnections to Precipitation Extremes over the United States in the High-Resolution Version of E3SM, J. Climate, 35, 3371–3393, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-20-1011.1, 2022. a
Mahoney, K., Scott, J. D., Alexander, M., McCrary, R., Hughes, M., Swales, D., and Bukovsky, M.: Cool season precipitation projections for California and the Western United States in NA-CORDEX models, Clim. Dynam., 56, 3081–3102, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-021-05632-z, 2021. a
Maraun, D., Wetterhall, F., Ireson, A. M., Chandler, R. E., Kendon, E. J., Widmann, M., Brienen, S., Rust, H. W., Sauter, T., Themessl, M., Venema, V. K. C., Chun, K. P., Goodess, C. M., Jones, R. G., Onof, C., Vrac, M., and Thiele-Eich, I.: Precipitation Downscaling under Climate Change: Recent Developments to Bridge the Gap between Dynamical Models and the End User, Rev. Geophys., 48, Rg3003, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009rg000314, 2010. a
Marshall, A. M., Abatzoglou, J. T., Link, T. E., and Tennant, C. J.: Projected Changes in Interannual Variability of Peak Snowpack Amount and Timing in the Western United States, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 8882–8892, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019gl083770, 2019. a
Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., and Gomis, M.: Climate change 2021: the physical science basis, Contribution of working group I to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896, 2021. a
Menne, M. J., Durre, I., Korzeniewski, B., McNeal, S., Thomas, K., Yin, X., Anthony, S., Ray, R., Vose, R. S., and Gleason, B. E.: Global historical climatology network-daily (GHCN-Daily), Version 3, NOAA National Climatic Data Center, 10, V5D21VHZ, https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/metadata/geoportal/rest/metadata/item/gov.noaa.ncdc:C00861/html (last access: 29 April 2024), 2012a. a
Menne, M. J., Durre, I., Vose, R. S., Gleason, B. E., and Houston, T. G.: An overview of the global historical climatology network-daily database, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 29, 897–910, 2012b. a
Meyer, J. D. D. and Jin, J.: The response of future projections of the North American monsoon when combining dynamical downscaling and bias correction of CCSM4 output, Clim. Dynam., 49, 433–447, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3352-8, 2016. a
Minder, J. R., Letcher, T. W., and Liu, C.: The Character and Causes of Elevation-Dependent Warming in High-Resolution Simulations of Rocky Mountain Climate Change, J. Climate, 31, 2093–2113, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0321.1, 2018. a
Morrison, H. and Milbrandt, J. A.: Parameterization of Cloud Microphysics Based on the Prediction of Bulk Ice Particle Properties. Part I: Scheme Description and Idealized Tests, J. Atmos. Sci., 72, 287–311, https://doi.org/10.1175/jas-d-14-0065.1, 2015. a
Musselman, K. N., Clark, M. P., Liu, C., Ikeda, K., and Rasmussen, R.: Slower snowmelt in a warmer world, Nat. Clim. Change, 7, 214–219, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3225, 2017. a
Musselman, K. N., Lehner, F., Ikeda, K., Clark, M. P., Prein, A. F., Liu, C., Barlage, M., and Rasmussen, R.: Projected increases and shifts in rain-on-snow flood risk over western North America, Nat. Clim. Change, 8, 808–812, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0236-4, 2018. a
Nauslar, N. J., Hatchett, B. J., Brown, T. J., Kaplan, M. L., and Mejia, J. F.: Impact of the North American monsoon on wildfire activity in the southwest United States, Int. J. Climatol., 39, 1539–1554, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5899, 2018. a
Neumann, P., Duben, P., Adamidis, P., Bauer, P., Bruck, M., Kornblueh, L., Klocke, D., Stevens, B., Wedi, N., and Biercamp, J.: Assessing the scales in numerical weather and climate predictions: will exascale be the rescue?, Philos. T. R. Soc. A, 377, 20180148, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0148, 2019. a, b, c, d
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
O’Brien, J. P. and Deser, C.: Quantifying and Understanding Forced Changes to Unforced Modes of Atmospheric Circulation Variability over the North Pacific in a Coupled Model Large Ensemble, J. Climate, 36, 19–37, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-22-0101.1, 2023. a
O’Brien, T. A., Sloan, L. C., Chuang, P. Y., Faloona, I. C., and Johnstone, J. A.: Multidecadal simulation of coastal fog with a regional climate model, Clim. Dynam., 40, 2801–2812, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1486-x, 2012. a
Pagès, M., Pepin, N., and Miró, J.: Measurement and modelling of temperature cold pools in the C erdanya valley (Pyrenees), Spain, Meteorological Applications, 24, 290–302, 2017. a
Palmer, P. L.: The SCS snow survey water supply forecasting program: Current operations and future directions, Western Snow Conf., 43–51, https://westernsnowconference.org/sites/westernsnowconference.org/PDFs/1988Palmer.pdf, (last access: 29 April 2024), 1988. a
Pathak, T., Maskey, M., Dahlberg, J., Kearns, F., Bali, K., and Zaccaria, D.: Climate Change Trends and Impacts on California Agriculture: A Detailed Review, Agronomy, 8, 25, https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8030025, 2018. a
Patricola, C. M., O’Brien, J. P., Risser, M. D., Rhoades, A. M., O’Brien, T. A., Ullrich, P. A., Stone, D. A., and Collins, W. D.: Maximizing ENSO as a source of western US hydroclimate predictability, Clim. Dynam., 54, 351–372, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-05004-8, 2020. a
Petch, J.: Sensitivity studies of developing convection in a cloud‐resolving model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 132, 345–358, 2006. a
Pierce, D. W., Su, L., Cayan, D. R., Risser, M. D., Livneh, B., and Lettenmaier, D. P.: An extreme-preserving long-term gridded daily precipitation data set for the conterminous United States, J. Hydrometeorol., 22, 1883–1895, https://doi.org/10.1175/jhm-d-20-0212.1, 2021. a
Pilié, R., Mack, E., Rogers, C., Katz, U., and Kocmond, W.: The formation of marine fog and the development of fog-stratus systems along the California coast, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 18, 1275–1286, 1979. a
Pincus, R., Mlawer, E. J., and Delamere, J. S.: Balancing Accuracy, Efficiency, and Flexibility in Radiation Calculations for Dynamical Models, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 3074–3089, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001621, 2019. a
Porter, K., Wein, A., Alpers, C. N., Baez, A., Barnard, P. L., Carter, J., Corsi, A., Costner, J., Cox, D., and Das, T.: Overview of the ARkStorm scenario, Report 2331-1258, US Geological Survey, https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20101312, 2011. a, b
Prein, A. F., Langhans, W., Fosser, G., Ferrone, A., Ban, N., Goergen, K., Keller, M., Tolle, M., Gutjahr, O., Feser, F., Brisson, E., Kollet, S., Schmidli, J., van Lipzig, N. P., and Leung, R.: A review on regional convection-permitting climate modeling: Demonstrations, prospects, and challenges, Rev. Geophys., 53, 323–361, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014RG000475, 2015. a, b
Prein, A. F., Towler, E., Ge, M., Llewellyn, D., Baker, S., Tighi, S., and Barrett, L.: Sub‐Seasonal Predictability of North American Monsoon Precipitation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 49, e2021GL095602, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021gl095602, 2022. a, b
Ralph, F. M., Neiman, P. J., Wick, G. A., Gutman, S. I., Dettinger, M. D., Cayan, D. R., and White, A. B.: Flooding on California's Russian River: Role of atmospheric rivers, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L13801, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL026689, 2006. a, b
Ralph, F. M., Rutz, J. J., Cordeira, J. M., Dettinger, M., Anderson, M., Reynolds, D., Schick, L. I., and Smallcomb, C.: A Scale to Characterize the Strength and Impacts of Atmospheric Rivers, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 100, 269–290, https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-18-0023.1, 2019. a
Rauscher, S. A. and Ringler, T. D.: Impact of Variable-Resolution Meshes on Midlatitude Baroclinic Eddies Using CAM-MPAS-A, Mon. Weather Rev., 142, 4256–4268, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-13-00366.1, 2014. a, b
Rauscher, S. A., Ringler, T. D., Skamarock, W. C., and Mirin, A. A.: Exploring a Global Multiresolution Modeling Approach Using Aquaplanet Simulations, J. Climate, 26, 2432–2452, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00154.1, 2013. a
Rhoades, A. M., Huang, X. Y., Ullrich, P. A., and Zarzycki, C. M.: Characterizing Sierra Nevada Snowpack Using Variable-Resolution CESM, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 55, 173–196, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jamc-D-15-0156.1, 2016. a, b
Rhoades, A. M., Jones, A. D., and Ullrich, P. A.: The Changing Character of the California Sierra Nevada as a Natural Reservoir, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 13008–13019, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018gl080308, 2018a. a, b, c
Rhoades, A. M., Ullrich, P. A., Zarzycki, C. M., Johansen, H., Margulis, S. A., Morrison, H., Xu, Z., and Collins, W. D.: Sensitivity of Mountain Hydroclimate Simulations in Variable‐Resolution CESM to Microphysics and Horizontal Resolution, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10, 1357–1380, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018ms001326, 2018b. a
Rhoades, A. M., Jones, A. D., O'Brien, T. A., O'Brien, J. P., Ullrich, P. A., and Zarzycki, C. M.: Influences of North Pacific Ocean Domain Extent on the Western U.S. Winter Hydroclimatology in Variable‐Resolution CESM, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2019JD031977, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019jd031977, 2020a. a, b
Rhoades, A. M., Jones, A. D., Srivastava, A., Huang, H., O'Brien, T. A., Patricola, C. M., Ullrich, P. A., Wehner, M., and Zhou, Y.: The Shifting Scales of Western U.S. Landfalling Atmospheric Rivers Under Climate Change, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL089096, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020gl089096, 2020b. a
Rhoades, A. M., Risser, M. D., Stone, D. A., Wehner, M. F., and Jones, A. D.: Implications of warming on western United States landfalling atmospheric rivers and their flood damages, Weather and Climate Extremes, 32, 100326, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2021.100326, 2021. a, b
Rhoades, A. M., Zarzycki, C. M., Inda‐Diaz, H. A., Ombadi, M., Pasquier, U., Srivastava, A., Hatchett, B. J., Dennis, E., Heggli, A., McCrary, R., McGinnis, S., Rahimi‐Esfarjani, S., Slinskey, E., Ullrich, P. A., Wehner, M., and Jones, A. D.: Recreating the California New Year's Flood Event of 1997 in a Regionally Refined Earth System Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2023MS003793, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023ms003793, 2023. a, b, c, d, e, f
Risser, M. D., Paciorek, C. J., Wehner, M. F., O’Brien, T. A., and Collins, W. D.: A probabilistic gridded product for daily precipitation extremes over the United States, Clim. Dynam., 53, 2517–2538, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04636-0, 2019. a, b
Sakaguchi, K., Lu, J., Leung, L. R., Zhao, C., Li, Y., and Hagos, S.: Sources and pathways of the upscale effects on the Southern Hemisphere jet in MPAS-CAM4 variable-resolution simulations, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 8, 1786–1805, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016MS000743, 2016. a
Samelson, R., De Szoeke, S., Skyllingstad, E., Barbour, P., and Durski, S.: Fog and Low-Level Stratus in Coupled Ocean–Atmosphere Simulations of the Northern California Current System Upwelling Season, Mon. Weather Rev., 149, 1593–1617, 2021. a
Satoh, M., Stevens, B., Judt, F., Khairoutdinov, M., Lin, S.-J., Putman, W. M., and Düben, P.: Global Cloud-Resolving Models, Current Climate Change Reports, 5, 172–184, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-019-00131-0, 2019. a
Schiemann, R., Athanasiadis, P., Barriopedro, D., Doblas-Reyes, F., Lohmann, K., Roberts, M. J., Sein, D. V., Roberts, C. D., Terray, L., and Vidale, P. L.: Northern Hemisphere blocking simulation in current climate models: evaluating progress from the Climate Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 to 6 and sensitivity to resolution, Weather Clim. Dynam., 1, 277–292, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-1-277-2020, 2020. a
Siirila-Woodburn, E. R., Rhoades, A. M., Hatchett, B. J., Huning, L. S., Szinai, J., Tague, C., Nico, P. S., Feldman, D. R., Jones, A. D., and Collins, W. D.: A low-to-no snow future and its impacts on water resources in the western United States, Nature Reviews Earth Environment, 2, 800–819, 2021. a, b, c
Skamarock, W. C., Duda, M. G., Ha, S., and Park, S.-H.: Limited-area atmospheric modeling using an unstructured mesh, Mon. Weather Rev., 146, 3445–3460, 2018. a
Solaun, K. and Cerdá, E.: Climate change impacts on renewable energy generation. A review of quantitative projections, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 116, 109415, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109415, 2019. a
Stevens, B., Satoh, M., Auger, L., Biercamp, J., Bretherton, C. S., Chen, X., Düben, P., Judt, F., Khairoutdinov, M., Klocke, D., Kodama, C., Kornblueh, L., Lin, S.-J., Neumann, P., Putman, W. M., Röber, N., Shibuya, R., Vanniere, B., Vidale, P. L., Wedi, N., and Zhou, L.: DYAMOND: the DYnamics of the Atmospheric general circulation Modeled On Non-hydrostatic Domains, Progress in Earth and Planetary Science, 6, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-019-0304-z, 2019. a, b
Stewart, W. C.: Economic assessment of the ecosystem, University of California, Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-43/VOL_III/VIII_C23.PDF (last access: 29 April 2024), 1996. a
Sun, F., Berg, N., Hall, A., Schwartz, M., and Walton, D.: Understanding End‐of‐Century Snowpack Changes Over California's Sierra Nevada, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 933–943, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018gl080362, 2019. a, b, c
Swain, D. L.: A Shorter, Sharper Rainy Season Amplifies California Wildfire Risk, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL092843, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021gl092843, 2021. a
Tanaka, S. K., Zhu, T., Lund, J. R., Howitt, R. E., Jenkins, M. W., Pulido, M. A., Tauber, M., Ritzema, R. S., and Ferreira, I. C.: Climate warming and water management adaptation for California, Climatic Change, 76, 361–387, 2006. a
Tang, Q., Klein, S. A., Xie, S., Lin, W., Golaz, J.-C., Roesler, E. L., Taylor, M. A., Rasch, P. J., Bader, D. C., Berg, L. K., Caldwell, P., Giangrande, S. E., Neale, R. B., Qian, Y., Riihimaki, L. D., Zender, C. S., Zhang, Y., and Zheng, X.: Regionally refined test bed in E3SM atmosphere model version 1 (EAMv1) and applications for high-resolution modeling, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2679–2706, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2679-2019, 2019. a, b, c, d
Tang, Q., Golaz, J.-C., Van Roekel, L. P., Taylor, M. A., Lin, W., Hillman, B. R., Ullrich, P. A., Bradley, A. M., Guba, O., Wolfe, J. D., Zhou, T., Zhang, K., Zheng, X., Zhang, Y., Zhang, M., Wu, M., Wang, H., Tao, C., Singh, B., Rhoades, A. M., Qin, Y., Li, H.-Y., Feng, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, C., Zender, C. S., Xie, S., Roesler, E. L., Roberts, A. F., Mametjanov, A., Maltrud, M. E., Keen, N. D., Jacob, R. L., Jablonowski, C., Hughes, O. K., Forsyth, R. M., Di Vittorio, A. V., Caldwell, P. M., Bisht, G., McCoy, R. B., Leung, L. R., and Bader, D. C.: The fully coupled regionally refined model of E3SM version 2: overview of the atmosphere, land, and river results, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3953–3995, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3953-2023, 2023. a, b, c, d, e, f
Taylor, M. A., Guba, O., Steyer, A., Ullrich, P. A., Hall, D. M., and Eldrid, C.: An Energy Consistent Discretization of the Nonhydrostatic Equations in Primitive Variables, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001783, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001783, 2020. a
Tebaldi, C., Debeire, K., Eyring, V., Fischer, E., Fyfe, J., Friedlingstein, P., Knutti, R., Lowe, J., O'Neill, B., Sanderson, B., van Vuuren, D., Riahi, K., Meinshausen, M., Nicholls, Z., Tokarska, K. B., Hurtt, G., Kriegler, E., Lamarque, J.-F., Meehl, G., Moss, R., Bauer, S. E., Boucher, O., Brovkin, V., Byun, Y.-H., Dix, M., Gualdi, S., Guo, H., John, J. G., Kharin, S., Kim, Y., Koshiro, T., Ma, L., Olivié, D., Panickal, S., Qiao, F., Rong, X., Rosenbloom, N., Schupfner, M., Séférian, R., Sellar, A., Semmler, T., Shi, X., Song, Z., Steger, C., Stouffer, R., Swart, N., Tachiiri, K., Tang, Q., Tatebe, H., Voldoire, A., Volodin, E., Wyser, K., Xin, X., Yang, S., Yu, Y., and Ziehn, T.: Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6, Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 253–293, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, 2021. a
Tomita, H.: A stretched icosahedral grid by a new grid transformation, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 86, 107–119, 2008. a
Trenberth, K. E., Berry, J. C., and Buja, L. E.: Vertical interpolation and truncation of model-coordinate data, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Climate and Global Dynamics Division, https://doi.org/10.5065/D6HX19NH, 1993. a
Ullrich, P. A. and Taylor, M. A.: Arbitrary-order conservative and consistent remapping and a theory of linear maps: Part I, Mon. Weather Rev., 143, 2419–2440, 2015. a
Ullrich, P. A. and Zarzycki, C. M.: TempestExtremes: a framework for scale-insensitive pointwise feature tracking on unstructured grids, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1069–1090, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1069-2017, 2017. a, b
Ullrich, P. A., Devendran, D., and Johansen, H.: Arbitrary-order conservative and consistent remapping and a theory of linear maps: Part II, Mon. Weather Rev., 144, 1529–1549, 2016. a
Ullrich, P. A., Zarzycki, C. M., McClenny, E. E., Pinheiro, M. C., Stansfield, A. M., and Reed, K. A.: TempestExtremes v2.1: a community framework for feature detection, tracking, and analysis in large datasets, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5023–5048, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5023-2021, 2021. a, b
Vanos, J., Guzman-Echavarria, G., Baldwin, J. W., Bongers, C., Ebi, K. L., and Jay, O.: A physiological approach for assessing human survivability and liveability to heat in a changing climate, Nat. Commun., 14, 7653, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-43121-5, 2023. a
Walton, D. B., Hall, A., Berg, N., Schwartz, M., and Sun, F.: Incorporating Snow Albedo Feedback into Downscaled Temperature and Snow Cover Projections for California’s Sierra Nevada, J. Climate, 30, 1417–1438, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-16-0168.1, 2017. a, b
Wang, H., Easter, R. C., Zhang, R., Ma, P.-L., Singh, B., Zhang, K., Ganguly, D., Rasch, P. J., Burrows, S. M., Ghan, S. J., Lou, S., Qian, Y., Yang, Y., Feng, Y., Flanner, M., Leung, L. R., Liu, X., Shrivastava, M., Sun, J., Tang, Q., Xie, S., and Yoon, J.-H.: Aerosols in the E3SM Version 1: New Developments and Their Impacts on Radiative Forcing, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001851, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001851, 2020. a
Wang, M. N., Ullrich, P., and Millstein, D.: The future of wind energy in California: Future projections with the Variable-Resolution CESM, Renew. Energ., 127, 242–257, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.04.031, 2018. a
Westerling, A. L., Hidalgo, H. G., Cayan, D. R., and Swetnam, T. W.: Warming and earlier spring increase western US forest wildfire activity, Science, 313, 940–943, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1128834, 2006. a, b
Williams, A. P., Abatzoglou, J. T., Gershunov, A., Guzman‐Morales, J., Bishop, D. A., Balch, J. K., and Lettenmaier, D. P.: Observed Impacts of Anthropogenic Climate Change on Wildfire in California, Earth's Future, 7, 892–910, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019ef001210, 2019. a
Wing, I. S., Rose, A. Z., and Wein, A. M.: Economic Consequence Analysis of the ARkStorm Scenario, Nat. Hazards Rev., 17, A4015002, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)nh.1527-6996.0000173, 2016. a
Winter, K. J. P. M., Kotlarski, S., Scherrer, S. C., and Schär, C.: The Alpine snow-albedo feedback in regional climate models, Clim. Dynam., 48, 1109–1124, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3130-7, 2017. a
Wise, E. K.: Hydroclimatology of the US intermountain west, Prog. Phys. Geog., 36, 458–479, 2012. a
Wu, C., Liu, X., Lin, Z., Rhoades, A. M., Ullrich, P. A., Zarzycki, C. M., Lu, Z., and Rahimi-Esfarjani, S. R.: Exploring a Variable-Resolution Approach for Simulating Regional Climate in the Rocky Mountain Region Using the VR-CESM, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 10939–10965, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027008, 2017. a
Yano, J. I., Ziemianski, M. Z., Cullen, M., Termonia, P., Onvlee, J., Bengtsson, L., Carrassi, A., Davy, R., Deluca, A., Gray, S. L., Homar, V., Kohler, M., Krichak, S., Michaelides, S., Phillips, V. T. J., Soares, P. M. M., and Wyszogrodzki, A. A.: Scientific Challenges of Convective-Scale Numerical Weather Prediction, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 99, 699–710, https://doi.org/10.1175/Bams-D-17-0125.1, 2018. a
Zängl, G.: Dynamical aspects of wintertime cold-air pools in an Alpine valley system, Mon. Weather Rev., 133, 2721–2740, 2005. a
Zarzycki, C. M. and Jablonowski, C.: A multidecadal simulation of Atlantic tropical cyclones using a variable-resolution global atmospheric general circulation model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 6, 805–828, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014MS000352, 2014. a
Zender, C. S.: Analysis of self-describing gridded geoscience data with netCDF Operators (NCO), Environ. Modell. Softw., 23, 1338–1342, 2008. a
Zeng, X., Broxton, P., and Dawson, N.: Snowpack change from 1982 to 2016 over conterminous United States, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 12940–12947, 2018. a
Zhang, J. and Bogenschutz, P.: Code, Data, and Technical Note for SCREAM California Convection-Permitting Regionally Refined Model 0.0 version (0.1), Zenodo [data set and code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11088673, 2024.
Zhang, K., Liu, X., Yoon, J.-H., Wang, M., Comstock, J. M., Barahona, D., and Kooperman, G.: Assessing aerosol indirect effect through ice clouds in CAM5, AIP Conf. Proc., 1527, 751, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4803379, 2013. a
Zhang, K., Zhang, W., Wan, H., Rasch, P. J., Ghan, S. J., Easter, R. C., Shi, X., Wang, Y., Wang, H., Ma, P.-L., Zhang, S., Sun, J., Burrows, S. M., Shrivastava, M., Singh, B., Qian, Y., Liu, X., Golaz, J.-C., Tang, Q., Zheng, X., Xie, S., Lin, W., Feng, Y., Wang, M., Yoon, J.-H., and Leung, L. R.: Effective radiative forcing of anthropogenic aerosols in E3SM version 1: historical changes, causality, decomposition, and parameterization sensitivities, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 9129–9160, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9129-2022, 2022. a
Zheng, X., Li, Q., Zhou, T., Tang, Q., Van Roekel, L. P., Golaz, J.-C., Wang, H., and Cameron-Smith, P.: Description of historical and future projection simulations by the global coupled E3SMv1.0 model as used in CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3941–3967, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3941-2022, 2022. a, b
Short summary
We developed a regionally refined climate model that allows resolved convection and performed a 20-year projection to the end of the century. The model has a resolution of 3.25 km in California, which allows us to predict climate with unprecedented accuracy, and a resolution of 100 km for the rest of the globe to achieve efficient, self-consistent simulations. The model produces superior results in reproducing climate patterns over California that typical modern climate models cannot resolve.
We developed a regionally refined climate model that allows resolved convection and performed a...
