Articles | Volume 18, issue 17
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5655-2025
© Author(s) 2025. 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-18-5655-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
05 Sep 2025
Development and technical paper |
| 05 Sep 2025
| 05 Sep 2025
Features of mid- and high-latitude low-level clouds and their relation to strong aerosol effects in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 2 (E3SMv2)
Atmospheric, Climate, and Earth Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA
Abhishek Yenpure
Kitware, Inc., Clifton Park, NY, USA
Berk Geveci
Kitware, Inc., Clifton Park, NY, USA
Richard C. Easter
Atmospheric, Climate, and Earth Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA
Philip J. Rasch
Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
Kai Zhang
Atmospheric, Climate, and Earth Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA
Xubin Zeng
Department of Hydrology and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
Related authors
Yu Yao, Po-Lun Ma, Yi Qin, Matthew W. Christensen, Hui Wan, Kai Zhang, Balwinder Singh, Meng Huang, and Mikhail Ovchinnikov
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-523, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-523, 2024
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Giant aerosols have substantial effects on warm rain formation. However, it remains challenging to quantify the impact of giant particles at global scale. In this work, we applied earth system model to investigate its impacts by implementing new giant aerosol treatments to consider its physical process. We found this approach substantially affect liquid cloud and improved model's precipitation response to aerosols. Our findings demonstrate the significant impact of giant aerosols on climate.
Hui Wan, Kai Zhang, Christopher J. Vogl, Carol S. Woodward, Richard C. Easter, Philip J. Rasch, Yan Feng, and Hailong Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1387–1407, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1387-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1387-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Sophisticated numerical models of the Earth's atmosphere include representations of many physical and chemical processes. In numerical simulations, these processes need to be calculated in a certain sequence. This study reveals the weaknesses of the sequence of calculations used for aerosol processes in a global atmosphere model. A revision of the sequence is proposed and its impacts on the simulated global aerosol climatology are evaluated.
Christopher J. Vogl, Hui Wan, Carol S. Woodward, and Quan M. Bui
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1409–1428, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1409-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1409-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Generally speaking, accurate climate simulation requires an accurate evolution of the underlying mathematical equations on large computers. The equations are typically formulated and evolved in process groups. Process coupling refers to how the evolution of each group is combined with that of other groups to evolve the full set of equations for the whole atmosphere. This work presents a mathematical framework to evaluate methods without the need to first implement the methods.
Shixuan Zhang, Kai Zhang, Hui Wan, and Jian Sun
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6787–6816, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6787-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6787-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates the nudging implementation in the EAMv1 model. We find that (1) revising the sequence of calculations and using higher-frequency constraining data to improve the performance of a simulation nudged to EAMv1’s own meteorology, (2) using the relocated nudging tendency and 3-hourly ERA5 reanalysis to obtain a better agreement between nudged simulations and observations, and (3) using wind-only nudging are recommended for the estimates of global mean aerosol effects.
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.
Hui Wan, Kai Zhang, Philip J. Rasch, Vincent E. Larson, Xubin Zeng, Shixuan Zhang, and Ross Dixon
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3205–3231, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3205-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3205-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes a tool embedded in a global climate model for sampling atmospheric conditions and monitoring physical processes as a numerical simulation is being carried out. The tool facilitates process-level model evaluation by allowing the users to select a wide range of quantities and processes to monitor at run time without having to do tedious ad hoc coding.
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.
Hui Wan, Shixuan Zhang, Philip J. Rasch, Vincent E. Larson, Xubin Zeng, and Huiping Yan
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1921–1948, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1921-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1921-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Numerical models used in weather and climate research and prediction unavoidably contain numerical errors resulting from temporal discretization, and the impact of such errors can be substantial. Complex process interactions often make it difficult to pinpoint the exact sources of such errors. This study uses a series of sensitivity experiments to identify components in a global atmosphere model that are responsible for time step sensitivities in various cloud regimes.
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.
Mariya Petrenko, Ralph Kahn, Mian Chin, Susanne E. Bauer, Tommi Bergman, Huisheng Bian, Gabriele Curci, Ben Johnson, Johannes W. Kaiser, Zak Kipling, Harri Kokkola, Xiaohong Liu, Keren Mezuman, Tero Mielonen, Gunnar Myhre, Xiaohua Pan, Anna Protonotariou, Samuel Remy, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Philip Stier, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Hailong Wang, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Kai Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1545–1567, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We compared smoke plume simulations from 11 global models to each other and to satellite smoke amount observations aimed at constraining smoke source strength. In regions where plumes are thick and background aerosol is low, models and satellites compare well. However, the input emission inventory tends to underestimate in many places, and particle property and loss rate assumptions vary enormously among models, causing uncertainties that require systematic in situ measurements to resolve.
Johannes Mülmenstädt, Andrew S. Ackerman, Ann M. Fridlind, Meng Huang, Po-Lun Ma, Naser Mahfouz, Susanne E. Bauer, Susannah M. Burrows, Matthew W. Christensen, Sudhakar Dipu, Andrew Gettelman, L. Ruby Leung, Florian Tornow, Johannes Quaas, Adam C. Varble, Hailong Wang, Kai Zhang, and Youtong Zheng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 13633–13652, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13633-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-13633-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Stratocumulus clouds play a large role in Earth's climate by reflecting incoming solar energy back to space. Turbulence at stratocumulus cloud top mixes in dry, warm air, which can lead to cloud dissipation. This process is challenging for coarse-resolution global models to represent. We show that global models nevertheless agree well with our process understanding. Global models also think the process is less important for the climate than other lines of evidence have led us to conclude.
Philip J. Rasch, Haruki Hirasawa, Mingxuan Wu, Sarah J. Doherty, Robert Wood, Hailong Wang, Andy Jones, James Haywood, and Hansi Singh
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7963–7994, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7963-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7963-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce a protocol to compare computer climate simulations to better understand a proposed strategy intended to counter warming and climate impacts from greenhouse gas increases. This slightly changes clouds in six ocean regions to reflect more sunlight and cool the Earth. Example changes in clouds and climate are shown for three climate models. Cloud changes differ between the models, but precipitation and surface temperature changes are similar when their cooling effects are made similar.
Soodabeh Namdari, Sanja Dmitrovic, Gao Chen, Yonghoon Choi, Ewan Crosbie, Joshua P. DiGangi, Glenn S. Diskin, Richard A. Ferrare, Johnathan W. Hair, Simon Kirschler, John B. Nowak, Kenneth L. Thornhill, Christiane Voigt, Holger Vömel, Xubin Zeng, and Armin Sorooshian
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3024, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We conducted this study to assess the accuracy of airborne measurements of wind, temperature, and humidity, essential for understanding atmospheric processes. Using data from NASA's ACTIVATE campaign, we compared measurements from the TAMMS and DLH aboard a Falcon aircraft with dropsondes from a King Air, matching data points based on location and time using statistical methods. The study showed strong agreement, confirming the reliability of these methods for advancing climate models.
Shuaiqi Tang, Hailong Wang, Xiang-Yu Li, Jingyi Chen, Armin Sorooshian, Xubin Zeng, Ewan Crosbie, Kenneth L. Thornhill, Luke D. Ziemba, and Christiane Voigt
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 10073–10092, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10073-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-10073-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We examined marine boundary layer clouds and their interactions with aerosols in the E3SM single-column model (SCM) for a case study. The SCM shows good agreement when simulating the clouds with high-resolution models. It reproduces the relationship between cloud droplet and aerosol particle number concentrations as produced in global models. However, the relationship between cloud liquid water and droplet number concentration is different, warranting further investigation.
Bo-Wen Shen, Roger Pielke Sr., and Xubin Zeng
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.32941.15849, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.32941.15849, 2024
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
Our reanalysis does not support the claim that Lorenz’s and Lilly’s formulas are mathematically or physically comparable. No common factor of 2^{−2/3} can be robustly determined from Lorenz's data, disproving the assumption that the saturation time difference and turnover time are linearly proportional over wave modes. These issues, along with the highly simplified features of the Lorenz 1969 model, indicate that an upper bound for the predictability limit has not been robustly determined.
Johannes Mülmenstädt, Edward Gryspeerdt, Sudhakar Dipu, Johannes Quaas, Andrew S. Ackerman, Ann M. Fridlind, Florian Tornow, Susanne E. Bauer, Andrew Gettelman, Yi Ming, Youtong Zheng, Po-Lun Ma, Hailong Wang, Kai Zhang, Matthew W. Christensen, Adam C. Varble, L. Ruby Leung, Xiaohong Liu, David Neubauer, Daniel G. Partridge, Philip Stier, and Toshihiko Takemura
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7331–7345, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7331-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7331-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Human activities release copious amounts of small particles called aerosols into the atmosphere. These particles change how much sunlight clouds reflect to space, an important human perturbation of the climate, whose magnitude is highly uncertain. We found that the latest climate models show a negative correlation but a positive causal relationship between aerosols and cloud water. This means we need to be very careful when we interpret observational studies that can only see correlation.
Sanja Dmitrovic, Johnathan W. Hair, Brian L. Collister, Ewan Crosbie, Marta A. Fenn, Richard A. Ferrare, David B. Harper, Chris A. Hostetler, Yongxiang Hu, John A. Reagan, Claire E. Robinson, Shane T. Seaman, Taylor J. Shingler, Kenneth L. Thornhill, Holger Vömel, Xubin Zeng, and Armin Sorooshian
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3515–3532, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3515-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3515-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study introduces and evaluates a new ocean surface wind speed product from the NASA Langley Research Center (LARC) airborne High-Spectral-Resolution Lidar – Generation 2 (HSRL-2) during the NASA ACTIVATE mission. We show that HSRL-2 surface wind speed data are accurate when compared to ground-truth dropsonde measurements. Therefore, the HSRL-2 instrument is able obtain accurate, high-resolution surface wind speed data in airborne field campaigns.
Nenghan Wan, Xiaomao Lin, Roger A. Pielke Sr., Xubin Zeng, and Amanda M. Nelson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 2123–2137, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2123-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2123-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Global warming occurs at a rate of 0.21 K per decade, resulting in about 9.5 % K−1 of water vapor response to temperature from 1993 to 2021. Terrestrial areas experienced greater warming than the ocean, with a ratio of 2 : 1. The total precipitable water change in response to surface temperature changes showed a variation around 6 % K−1–8 % K−1 in the 15–55° N latitude band. Further studies are needed to identify the mechanisms leading to different water vapor responses.
Leong Wai Siu, Joseph S. Schlosser, David Painemal, Brian Cairns, Marta A. Fenn, Richard A. Ferrare, Johnathan W. Hair, Chris A. Hostetler, Longlei Li, Mary M. Kleb, Amy Jo Scarino, Taylor J. Shingler, Armin Sorooshian, Snorre A. Stamnes, and Xubin Zeng
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 2739–2759, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2739-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2739-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
An unprecedented 3-year aerosol dataset was collected from a recent NASA field campaign over the western North Atlantic Ocean, which offers a special opportunity to evaluate two state-of-the-art remote sensing instruments, one lidar and the other polarimeter, on the same aircraft. Special attention has been paid to validate aerosol optical depth data and their uncertainties when no reference dataset is available. Physical reasons for the disagreement between two instruments are discussed.
Taufiq Hassan, Kai Zhang, Jianfeng Li, Balwinder Singh, Shixuan Zhang, Hailong Wang, and Po-Lun Ma
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3507–3532, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3507-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3507-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Anthropogenic aerosol emissions are an essential part of global aerosol models. Significant errors can exist from the loss of emission heterogeneity. We introduced an emission treatment that significantly improved aerosol emission heterogeneity in high-resolution model simulations, with improvements in simulated aerosol surface concentrations. The emission treatment will provide a more accurate representation of aerosol emissions and their effects on climate.
Pengfei Shi, L. Ruby Leung, Bin Wang, Kai Zhang, Samson M. Hagos, and Shixuan Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3025–3040, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3025-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3025-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Improving climate predictions have profound socio-economic impacts. This study introduces a new weakly coupled land data assimilation (WCLDA) system for a coupled climate model. We demonstrate improved simulation of soil moisture and temperature in many global regions and throughout the soil layers. Furthermore, significant improvements are also found in reproducing the time evolution of the 2012 US Midwest drought. The WCLDA system provides the groundwork for future predictability studies.
Yawen Liu, Yun Qian, Philip J. Rasch, Kai Zhang, Lai-yung Ruby Leung, Yuhang Wang, Minghuai Wang, Hailong Wang, Xin Huang, and Xiu-Qun Yang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 3115–3128, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-3115-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-3115-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Fire management has long been a challenge. Here we report that spring-peak fire activity over southern Mexico and Central America (SMCA) has a distinct quasi-biennial signal by measuring multiple fire metrics. This signal is initially driven by quasi-biennial variability in precipitation and is further amplified by positive feedback of fire–precipitation interaction at short timescales. This work highlights the importance of fire–climate interactions in shaping fires on an interannual scale.
Yu Yao, Po-Lun Ma, Yi Qin, Matthew W. Christensen, Hui Wan, Kai Zhang, Balwinder Singh, Meng Huang, and Mikhail Ovchinnikov
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-523, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-523, 2024
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Giant aerosols have substantial effects on warm rain formation. However, it remains challenging to quantify the impact of giant particles at global scale. In this work, we applied earth system model to investigate its impacts by implementing new giant aerosol treatments to consider its physical process. We found this approach substantially affect liquid cloud and improved model's precipitation response to aerosols. Our findings demonstrate the significant impact of giant aerosols on climate.
Hui Wan, Kai Zhang, Christopher J. Vogl, Carol S. Woodward, Richard C. Easter, Philip J. Rasch, Yan Feng, and Hailong Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1387–1407, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1387-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1387-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Sophisticated numerical models of the Earth's atmosphere include representations of many physical and chemical processes. In numerical simulations, these processes need to be calculated in a certain sequence. This study reveals the weaknesses of the sequence of calculations used for aerosol processes in a global atmosphere model. A revision of the sequence is proposed and its impacts on the simulated global aerosol climatology are evaluated.
Christopher J. Vogl, Hui Wan, Carol S. Woodward, and Quan M. Bui
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1409–1428, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1409-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1409-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Generally speaking, accurate climate simulation requires an accurate evolution of the underlying mathematical equations on large computers. The equations are typically formulated and evolved in process groups. Process coupling refers to how the evolution of each group is combined with that of other groups to evolve the full set of equations for the whole atmosphere. This work presents a mathematical framework to evaluate methods without the need to first implement the methods.
Jianfeng Li, Kai Zhang, Taufiq Hassan, Shixuan Zhang, Po-Lun Ma, Balwinder Singh, Qiyang Yan, and Huilin Huang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1327–1347, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1327-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1327-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
By comparing E3SM simulations with and without regional refinement, we find that model horizontal grid spacing considerably affects the simulated aerosol mass budget, aerosol–cloud interactions, and the effective radiative forcing of anthropogenic aerosols. The study identifies the critical physical processes strongly influenced by model resolution. It also highlights the benefit of applying regional refinement in future modeling studies at higher or even convection-permitting resolutions.
Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Peter R. Colarco, Eric C. Apel, Donald R. Blake, Karl Froyd, Rebecca S. Hornbrook, Jose Jimenez, Pedro Campuzano Jost, Michael Lawler, Mingxu Liu, Marianne Tronstad Lund, Hitoshi Matsui, Benjamin A. Nault, Joyce E. Penner, Andrew W. Rollins, Gregory Schill, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Hailong Wang, Lu Xu, Kai Zhang, and Jialei Zhu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 1717–1741, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1717-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-1717-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This work studies sulfur in the remote troposphere at global and seasonal scales using aircraft measurements and multi-model simulations. The goal is to understand the sulfur cycle over remote oceans, spread of model simulations, and observation–model discrepancies. Such an understanding and comparison with real observations are crucial to narrow down the uncertainties in model sulfur simulations and improve understanding of the sulfur cycle in atmospheric air quality, climate, and ecosystems.
Jim M. Haywood, Andy Jones, Anthony C. Jones, Paul Halloran, and Philip J. Rasch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 15305–15324, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-15305-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-15305-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The difficulties in ameliorating global warming and the associated climate change via conventional mitigation are well documented, with all climate model scenarios exceeding 1.5 °C above the preindustrial level in the near future. There is therefore a growing interest in geoengineering to reflect a greater proportion of sunlight back to space and offset some of the global warming. We use a state-of-the-art Earth-system model to investigate two of the most prominent geoengineering strategies.
Shuaiqi Tang, Adam C. Varble, Jerome D. Fast, Kai Zhang, Peng Wu, Xiquan Dong, Fan Mei, Mikhail Pekour, Joseph C. Hardin, and Po-Lun Ma
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6355–6376, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6355-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6355-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
To assess the ability of Earth system model (ESM) predictions, we developed a tool called ESMAC Diags to understand how aerosols, clouds, and aerosol–cloud interactions are represented in ESMs. This paper describes its version 2 functionality. We compared the model predictions with measurements taken by planes, ships, satellites, and ground instruments over four regions across the world. Results show that this new tool can help identify model problems and guide future development of ESMs.
Armin Sorooshian, Mikhail D. Alexandrov, Adam D. Bell, Ryan Bennett, Grace Betito, Sharon P. Burton, Megan E. Buzanowicz, Brian Cairns, Eduard V. Chemyakin, Gao Chen, Yonghoon Choi, Brian L. Collister, Anthony L. Cook, Andrea F. Corral, Ewan C. Crosbie, Bastiaan van Diedenhoven, Joshua P. DiGangi, Glenn S. Diskin, Sanja Dmitrovic, Eva-Lou Edwards, Marta A. Fenn, Richard A. Ferrare, David van Gilst, Johnathan W. Hair, David B. Harper, Miguel Ricardo A. Hilario, Chris A. Hostetler, Nathan Jester, Michael Jones, Simon Kirschler, Mary M. Kleb, John M. Kusterer, Sean Leavor, Joseph W. Lee, Hongyu Liu, Kayla McCauley, Richard H. Moore, Joseph Nied, Anthony Notari, John B. Nowak, David Painemal, Kasey E. Phillips, Claire E. Robinson, Amy Jo Scarino, Joseph S. Schlosser, Shane T. Seaman, Chellappan Seethala, Taylor J. Shingler, Michael A. Shook, Kenneth A. Sinclair, William L. Smith Jr., Douglas A. Spangenberg, Snorre A. Stamnes, Kenneth L. Thornhill, Christiane Voigt, Holger Vömel, Andrzej P. Wasilewski, Hailong Wang, Edward L. Winstead, Kira Zeider, Xubin Zeng, Bo Zhang, Luke D. Ziemba, and Paquita Zuidema
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 3419–3472, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-3419-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-3419-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The NASA Aerosol Cloud meTeorology Interactions oVer the western ATlantic Experiment (ACTIVATE) produced a unique dataset for research into aerosol–cloud–meteorology interactions. HU-25 Falcon and King Air aircraft conducted systematic and spatially coordinated flights over the northwest Atlantic Ocean. This paper describes the ACTIVATE flight strategy, instrument and complementary dataset products, data access and usage details, and data application notes.
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.
Aishwarya Raman, Thomas Hill, Paul J. DeMott, Balwinder Singh, Kai Zhang, Po-Lun Ma, Mingxuan Wu, Hailong Wang, Simon P. Alexander, and Susannah M. Burrows
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 5735–5762, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5735-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5735-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Ice-nucleating particles (INPs) play an important role in cloud processes and associated precipitation. Yet, INPs are not accurately represented in climate models. This study attempts to uncover these gaps by comparing model-simulated INP concentrations against field campaign measurements in the SO for an entire year, 2017–2018. Differences in INP concentrations and variability between the model and observations have major implications for modeling cloud properties in high latitudes.
Shixuan Zhang, Kai Zhang, Hui Wan, and Jian Sun
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6787–6816, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6787-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6787-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates the nudging implementation in the EAMv1 model. We find that (1) revising the sequence of calculations and using higher-frequency constraining data to improve the performance of a simulation nudged to EAMv1’s own meteorology, (2) using the relocated nudging tendency and 3-hourly ERA5 reanalysis to obtain a better agreement between nudged simulations and observations, and (3) using wind-only nudging are recommended for the estimates of global mean aerosol effects.
Qirui Zhong, Nick Schutgens, Guido van der Werf, Twan van Noije, Kostas Tsigaridis, Susanne E. Bauer, Tero Mielonen, Alf Kirkevåg, Øyvind Seland, Harri Kokkola, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, David Neubauer, Zak Kipling, Hitoshi Matsui, Paul Ginoux, Toshihiko Takemura, Philippe Le Sager, Samuel Rémy, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Kai Zhang, Jialei Zhu, Svetlana G. Tsyro, Gabriele Curci, Anna Protonotariou, Ben Johnson, Joyce E. Penner, Nicolas Bellouin, Ragnhild B. Skeie, and Gunnar Myhre
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11009–11032, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11009-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11009-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Aerosol optical depth (AOD) errors for biomass burning aerosol (BBA) are evaluated in 18 global models against satellite datasets. Notwithstanding biases in satellite products, they allow model evaluations. We observe large and diverse model biases due to errors in BBA. Further interpretations of AOD diversities suggest large biases exist in key processes for BBA which require better constraining. These results can contribute to further model improvement and development.
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.
Shuaiqi Tang, Jerome D. Fast, Kai Zhang, Joseph C. Hardin, Adam C. Varble, John E. Shilling, Fan Mei, Maria A. Zawadowicz, and Po-Lun Ma
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4055–4076, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4055-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4055-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We developed an Earth system model (ESM) diagnostics package to compare various types of aerosol properties simulated in ESMs with aircraft, ship, and surface measurements from six field campaigns across spatial scales. The diagnostics package is coded and organized to be flexible and modular for future extension to other field campaign datasets and adapted to higher-resolution model simulations. Future releases will include comprehensive cloud and aerosol–cloud interaction diagnostics.
Susannah M. Burrows, Richard C. Easter, Xiaohong Liu, Po-Lun Ma, Hailong Wang, Scott M. Elliott, Balwinder Singh, Kai Zhang, and Philip J. Rasch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5223–5251, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5223-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5223-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Sea spray particles are composed of a mixture of salts and organic substances from oceanic microorganisms. In prior work, our team developed an approach connecting sea spray chemistry to ocean biology, called OCEANFILMS. Here we describe its implementation within an Earth system model, E3SM. We show that simulated sea spray chemistry is consistent with observed seasonal cycles and that sunlight reflected by simulated Southern Ocean clouds increases, consistent with analysis of satellite data.
Hui Wan, Kai Zhang, Philip J. Rasch, Vincent E. Larson, Xubin Zeng, Shixuan Zhang, and Ross Dixon
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3205–3231, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3205-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3205-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes a tool embedded in a global climate model for sampling atmospheric conditions and monitoring physical processes as a numerical simulation is being carried out. The tool facilitates process-level model evaluation by allowing the users to select a wide range of quantities and processes to monitor at run time without having to do tedious ad hoc coding.
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.
Hossein Dadashazar, David Painemal, Majid Alipanah, Michael Brunke, Seethala Chellappan, Andrea F. Corral, Ewan Crosbie, Simon Kirschler, Hongyu Liu, Richard H. Moore, Claire Robinson, Amy Jo Scarino, Michael Shook, Kenneth Sinclair, K. Lee Thornhill, Christiane Voigt, Hailong Wang, Edward Winstead, Xubin Zeng, Luke Ziemba, Paquita Zuidema, and Armin Sorooshian
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10499–10526, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10499-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10499-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates the seasonal cycle of cloud drop number concentration (Nd) over the western North Atlantic Ocean (WNAO) using multiple datasets. Reasons for the puzzling discrepancy between the seasonal cycles of Nd and aerosol concentration were identified. Results indicate that Nd is highest in winter (when aerosol proxy values are often lowest) due to conditions both linked to cold-air outbreaks and that promote greater droplet activation.
Hui Wan, Shixuan Zhang, Philip J. Rasch, Vincent E. Larson, Xubin Zeng, and Huiping Yan
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1921–1948, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1921-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1921-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Numerical models used in weather and climate research and prediction unavoidably contain numerical errors resulting from temporal discretization, and the impact of such errors can be substantial. Complex process interactions often make it difficult to pinpoint the exact sources of such errors. This study uses a series of sensitivity experiments to identify components in a global atmosphere model that are responsible for time step sensitivities in various cloud regimes.
Bo Zhang, Hongyu Liu, James H. Crawford, Gao Chen, T. Duncan Fairlie, Scott Chambers, Chang-Hee Kang, Alastair G. Williams, Kai Zhang, David B. Considine, Melissa P. Sulprizio, and Robert M. Yantosca
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1861–1887, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1861-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1861-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We simulate atmospheric 222Rn using the GEOS-Chem model to improve understanding of 222Rn emissions and characterize convective transport in the model. We demonstrate the potential of a customized global 222Rn emission scenario to improve simulated surface 222Rn concentrations and seasonality. We assess convective transport using observed 222Rn vertical profiles. Results have important implications for using chemical transport models to interpret the transport of trace gases and aerosols.
Jingyu Wang, Jiwen Fan, Robert A. Houze Jr., Stella R. Brodzik, Kai Zhang, Guang J. Zhang, and Po-Lun Ma
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 719–734, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-719-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-719-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents an evaluation of the E3SM model against NEXRAD radar observations for the warm seasons during 2014–2016. The COSP forward simulator package is implemented in the model to generate radar reflectivity, and the NEXRAD observations are coarsened to the model resolution for comparison. The model severely underestimates the reflectivity above 4 km. Sensitivity tests on the parameters from cumulus parameterization and cloud microphysics do not improve this model bias.
Cited articles
Abdul-Razzak, H. and Ghan, S. J.: A parameterization of aerosol activation – 2. multiple aerosol types, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 6837–6844, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD901161, 2000. a
Abdul-Razzak, H., Ghan, S. J., and Rivera-Carpio, C.: A parameterization of aerosol activation: 1. Single aerosol type, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 103, 6123–6131, https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD03735, 1998. a, b
Bellouin, N., Quaas, J., Gryspeerdt, E., Kinne, S., Stier, P., Watson-Parris, D., Boucher, O., Carslaw, K. S., Christensen, M., Daniau, A.-L., Dufresne, J.-L., Feingold, G., Fiedler, S., Forster, P., Gettelman, A., Haywood, J. M., Lohmann, U., Malavelle, F., Mauritsen, T., McCoy, D. T., Myhre, G., Mülmenstädt, J., Neubauer, D., Possner, A., Rugenstein, M., Sato, Y., Schulz, M., Schwartz, S. E., Sourdeval, O., Storelvmo, T., Toll, V., Winker, D., and Stevens, B.: Bounding global aerosol radiative forcing of climate change, Rev. Geophys., 58, e2019RG000660, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000660, 2020. a, b
Burrows, S., Mahfouz, N., Fan, J., Shan, Y., Wu, M., Mülmenstädt, J., Wang, H., Zhang, K., Lin, W., Terai, C., Zheng, X., Xie, S., and Golaz, J.-C.: Reducing biases in the simulated historical temperature record through calibration of aerosol and cloud processes: Improvements to the aerosol forcing in E3SMv3, Department of Energy Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling (EESM) Principal Investigator Meeting, Rockville, Maryland, 2024. a
Crameri, F.: Scientific colour maps (8.0.1), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8409685, 2023. a
Dee, D. P., Uppala, S. M., Simmons, A. J., Berrisford, P., Poli, P., Kobayashi, S., Andrae, U., Balmaseda, M. A., Balsamo, G., Bauer, P., Bechtold, P., Beljaars, A. C. M., van de Berg, L., Bidlot, J., Bormann, N., Delsol, C., Dragani, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A. J., Haimberger, L., Healy, S. B., Hersbach, H., Hólm, E. V., Isaksen, L., Kållberg, P., Köhler, M., Matricardi, M., McNally, A. P., Monge-Sanz, B. M., Morcrette, J.-J., Park, B.-K., Peubey, C., de Rosnay, P., Tavolato, C., Thépaut, J.-N., and Vitart, F.: The ERA-Interim reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data assimilation system, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 553–597, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.828, 2011. a
Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Zhang, Y., Saylor, R. D., Chapman, E. G., Laulainen, N. S., Abdul-Razzak, H., Leung, L. R., Bian, X., and Zaveri, R. A.: MIRAGE: Model description and evaluation of aerosols and trace gases, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D20210, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004571, 2004. a, b
Gantt, B., He, J., Zhang, X., Zhang, Y., and Nenes, A.: Incorporation of advanced aerosol activation treatments into CESM/CAM5: model evaluation and impacts on aerosol indirect effects, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 7485–7497, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-7485-2014, 2014. a, b
Gettelman, A. and Morrison, H.: Advanced two-moment bulk microphysics for global models, Part I: Off-line tests and comparison with other schemes, J. Climate, 28, 1268–1287, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00102.1, 2015. a
Ghan, S. J. and Easter, R. C.: Impact of cloud-borne aerosol representation on aerosol direct and indirect effects, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 4163–4174, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4163-2006, 2006. a, b, c
Ghosh, P., Evans, K. J., Grosvenor, D. P., Kang, H.-G., Mahajan, S., Xu, M., Zhang, W., and Gordon, H.: Modifying the Abdul-Razzak & Ghan aerosol activation parameterization (version ARG2000) impacts simulated cloud radiative effects (shown in the UK Met Office Unified Model, version 13.0), EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2423, 2024. a, b
Gliß, J., Mortier, A., Schulz, M., Andrews, E., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Benedictow, A. M. K., Bian, H., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Griesfeller, J. J., Heckel, A., Kipling, Z., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Laj, P., Le Sager, P., Lund, M. T., Lund Myhre, C., Matsui, H., Myhre, G., Neubauer, D., van Noije, T., North, P., Olivié, D. J. L., Rémy, S., Sogacheva, L., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Tsyro, S. G.: AeroCom phase III multi-model evaluation of the aerosol life cycle and optical properties using ground- and space-based remote sensing as well as surface in situ observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 87–128, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-87-2021, 2021. a
Golaz, J.-C., Larson, V., and Cotton, W.: A PDF-Based Model for Boundary Layer Clouds. Part I: Method and Model Description, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 3540–3551, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059<3540:APBMFB>2.0.CO;2, 2002. 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., 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., Reeves Eyre, J. E. J., Riley, W. J., Ringler, T. D., Roberts, A. F., Roesler, E. L., Salinger, A. G., Shaheen, Z., Shi, X., Singh, B., Tang, J., Taylor, M. A., Thornton, P. E., Turner, A. K., Veneziani, M., Wan, H., Wang, H., Wang, S., Williams, D. N., Wolfram, P. J., Worley, P. H., Xie, S., Yang, Y., Yoon, J.-H., Zelinka, M. D., Zender, C. S., Zeng, X., Zhang, C., 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
Golaz, J.-C., Van Roekel, L. P., Zheng, X., Roberts, A. F., Wolfe, J. D., Lin, W., Bradley, A. M., Tang, Q., Maltrud, M. E., Forsyth, R. M., Zhang, C., Zhou, T., Zhang, K., Zender, C. S., Wu, M., Wang, H., Turner, A. K., Singh, B., Richter, J. H., Qin, Y., Petersen, M. R., Mametjanov, A., Ma, P.-L., Larson, V. E., Krishna, J., Keen, N. D., Jeffery, N., Hunke, E. C., Hannah, W. M., Guba, O., Griffin, B. M., Feng, Y., Engwirda, D., Di Vittorio, A. V., Dang, C., Conlon, L. M., Chen, C.-C.-J., Brunke, M. A., Bisht, G., Benedict, J. J., Asay-Davis, X. S., Zhang, Y., Zhang, M., Zeng, X., Xie, S., Wolfram, P. J., Vo, T., Veneziani, M., Tesfa, T. K., Sreepathi, S., Salinger, A. G., Reeves Eyre, J. E. J., Prather, M. J., Mahajan, S., Li, Q., Jones, P. W., Jacob, R. L., Huebler, G. W., Huang, X., Hillman, B. R., Harrop, B. E., Foucar, J. G., Fang, Y., Comeau, D. S., Caldwell, P. M., Bartoletti, T., Balaguru, K., Taylor, M. A., McCoy, R. B., Leung, L. R., and Bader, D. C.: The DOE E3SM Model Version 2: Overview of the Physical Model and Initial Model Evaluation, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2022MS003156, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022MS003156, 2022. a, b, c, d
Grosvenor, D. P. and Carslaw, K. S.: The decomposition of cloud–aerosol forcing in the UK Earth System Model (UKESM1), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 15681–15724, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-15681-2020, 2020. a
Grosvenor, D. P., Sourdeval, O., Zuidema, P., Ackerman, A., Alexandrov, M. D., Bennartz, R., Boers, R., Cairns, B., Chiu, J. C., Christensen, M., Deneke, H., Diamond, M., Feingold, G., Fridlind, A., Hünerbein, A., Knist, C., Kollias, P., Marshak, A., McCoy, D., Merk, D., Painemal, D., Rausch, J., Rosenfeld, D., Russchenberg, H., Seifert, P., Sinclair, K., Stier, P., van Diedenhoven, B., Wendisch, M., Werner, F., Wood, R., Zhang, Z., and Quaas, J.: Remote Sensing of Droplet Number Concentration in Warm Clouds: A Review of the Current State of Knowledge and Perspectives, Rev. Geophys., 56, 409–453, https://doi.org/10.1029/2017RG000593, 2018. a
Hoose, C., Kristjansson, J. E., Iversen, T., Kirkevå g, A., Seland, O., and Gettelman, A.: Constraining cloud droplet number concentration in GCMs suppresses the aerosol indirect effect, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L12807, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL038568, 2009. a, b, c
Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., Laakso, A., Bergman, T., Lehtinen, K. E. J., Mielonen, T., Arola, A., Stadtler, S., Korhonen, H., Ferrachat, S., Lohmann, U., Neubauer, D., Tegen, I., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Schultz, M. G., Bey, I., Stier, P., Daskalakis, N., Heald, C. L., and Romakkaniemi, S.: SALSA2.0: The sectional aerosol module of the aerosol–chemistry–climate model ECHAM6.3.0-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3833–3863, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3833-2018, 2018. a
Kooperman, G. J., Pritchard, M. S., Ghan, S. J., Wang, M., Somerville, R. C. J., and Russell, L. M.: Constraining the influence of natural variability to improve estimates of global aerosol indirect effects in a nudged version of the Community Atmosphere Model 5, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D23204, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018588, 2012. a
Larson, V. E.: CLUBB-SILHS: A parameterization of subgrid variability in the atmosphere, arXiv [preprint], arXiv:1711.03675v3, 2017. a
Larson, V. E. and Golaz, J.-C.: Using Probability Density Functions to Derive Consistent Closure Relationships among Higher-Order Moments, Mon. Weather Rev., 133, 1023–1042, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR2902.1, 2005. a
Larson, V. E., Golaz, J.-C., and Cotton, W. R.: Small-Scale and Mesoscale Variability in Cloudy Boundary Layers: Joint Probability Density Functions, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 3519–3539, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059<3519:SSAMVI>2.0.CO;2, 2002. a
Leung, L. R., Bader, D. C., Taylor, M. A., and McCoy, R. B.: An Introduction to the E3SM Special Collection: Goals, Science Drivers, Development, and Analysis, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001821, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001821, 2020. a
Liu, X., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Zaveri, R., Rasch, P., Shi, X., Lamarque, J.-F., Gettelman, A., Morrison, H., Vitt, F., Conley, A., Park, S., Neale, R., Hannay, C., Ekman, A. M. L., Hess, P., Mahowald, N., Collins, W., Iacono, M. J., Bretherton, C. S., Flanner, M. G., and Mitchell, D.: Toward a minimal representation of aerosols in climate models: description and evaluation in the Community Atmosphere Model CAM5, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 709–739, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-709-2012, 2012. a, b, c
Liu, X., Ma, P.-L., Wang, H., Tilmes, S., Singh, B., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., and Rasch, P. J.: Description and evaluation of a new four-mode version of the Modal Aerosol Module (MAM4) within version 5.3 of the Community Atmosphere Model, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 505–522, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-505-2016, 2016. a
Lohmann, U., Feichter, J., Chuang, C. C., and Penner, J. E.: Prediction of the number of cloud droplets in the ECHAM GCM, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104, 9169–9198, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900046, 1999. a
Lohmann, U., Feichter, J., Penner, J., and Leaitch, R.: Indirect effect of sulfate and carbonaceous aerosols: A mechanistic treatment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 12193–12206, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD901199, 2000. a
Mignot, J., Hourdin, F., Deshayes, J., Boucher, O., Gastineau, G., Musat, I., Vancoppenolle, M., Servonnat, J., Caubel, A., Chéruy, F., Denvil, S., Dufresne, J.-L., Ethé', C., Fairhead, L., Foujols, M.-A., Grandpeix, J.-Y., Levavasseur, G., Marti, O., Menary, M., Rio, C., Rousset, C., and Silvy, Y.: The Tuning Strategy of IPSL-CM6A-LR, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2020MS002340, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002340, 2021. a, b
Myhre, G., Samset, B. H., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T. K., Bian, H., Bellouin, N., Chin, M., Diehl, T., Easter, R. C., Feichter, J., Ghan, S. J., Hauglustaine, D., Iversen, T., Kinne, S., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F., Lin, G., Liu, X., Lund, M. T., Luo, G., Ma, X., van Noije, T., Penner, J. E., Rasch, P. J., Ruiz, A., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B., Stier, P., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., Wang, P., Wang, Z., Xu, L., Yu, H., Yu, F., Yoon, J.-H., Zhang, K., Zhang, H., and Zhou, C.: Radiative forcing of the direct aerosol effect from AeroCom Phase II simulations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1853–1877, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1853-2013, 2013. a
Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Stier, P., Partridge, D. G., Tegen, I., Bey, I., Stanelle, T., Kokkola, H., and Lohmann, U.: The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 2: Cloud evaluation, aerosol radiative forcing, and climate sensitivity, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3609–3639, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3609-2019, 2019. a, b, c
O, K.-T., Wood, R., and Bretherton, C. S.: Ultraclean Layers and Optically Thin Clouds in the Stratocumulus-to-Cumulus Transition. Part II: Depletion of Cloud Droplets and Cloud Condensation Nuclei through Collision–Coalescence, J. Atmos. Sci., 75, 1653–1673, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0218.1, 2018. a
Poku, C., Ross, A. N., Hill, A. A., Blyth, A. M., and Shipway, B.: Is a more physical representation of aerosol activation needed for simulations of fog?, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 7271–7292, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-7271-2021, 2021. a
Rasch, P. J., Xie, S., Ma, P.-L., Lin, W., Wang, H., Tang, Q., Burrows, S. M., Caldwell, P., Zhang, K., Easter, R. C., Cameron-Smith, P., Singh, B., Wan, H., Golaz, J.-C., Harrop, B. E., Roesler, E., Bacmeister, J., Larson, V. E., Evans, K. J., Qian, Y., Taylor, M., Leung, L. R., Zhang, Y., Brent, L., Branstetter, M., Hannay, C., Mahajan, S., Mametjanov, A., Neale, R., Richter, J. H., Yoon, J.-H., Zender, C. S., Bader, D., Flanner, M., Foucar, J. G., Jacob, R., Keen, N., Klein, S. A., Liu, X., Salinger, A., Shrivastava, M., and Yang, Y.: An Overview of the Atmospheric Component of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 2377–2411, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001629, 2019. a
Salzmann, M., Ferrachat, S., Tully, C., Miünch, S., Watson-Parris, D., Neubauer, D., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Rast, S., Heinold, B., Crueger, T., Brokopf, R., Mülmenstädt, J., Quaas, J., Wan, H., Zhang, K., Lohmann, U., Stier, P., and Tegen, I.: The Global Atmosphere-aerosol Model ICON-A-HAM2.3–Initial Model Evaluation and Effects of Radiation Balance Tuning on Aerosol Optical Thickness, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002699, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002699, 2022. a
Seinfeld, J. H., Bretherton, C., Carslaw, K. S., Coe, H., DeMott, P. J., Dunlea, E. J., Feingold, G., Ghan, S., Guenther, A. B., Kahn, R., Kraucunas, I., Kreidenweis, S. M., Molina, M. J., Nenes, A., Penner, J. E., Prather, K. A., Ramanathan, V., Ramaswamy, V., Rasch, P. J., Ravishankara, A. R., Rosenfeld, D., Stephens, G., and Wood, R.: Improving our fundamental understanding of the role of aerosol- cloud interactions in the climate system, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 5781–5790, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1514043113, 2016. a
Shan, Y., Fan, J., and Zhang, K.: Developing a Physically Based Solution for the Ultra-low Could Droplet Number Issue in E3SM, presentation at the Department of Energy Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling (EESM) Principal Investigator Meeting, Rockville, Maryland, 2024a. a
Shan, Y., Fan, J., Zhang, K., Shpund, J., Terai, C., Zhang, G. J., Song, X., Chen, C.-C.-J., Lin, W., Liu, X., Shrivastava, M., Wang, H., and Xie, S.: Improving Aerosol Radiative Forcing and Climate in E3SM: Impacts of New Cloud Microphysics and Improved Wet Removal Treatments, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 16, e2023MS004059, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023MS004059, 2024b. a
Smith, C. J., Kramer, R. J., Myhre, G., Alterskjær, K., Collins, W., Sima, A., Boucher, O., Dufresne, J.-L., Nabat, P., Michou, M., Yukimoto, S., Cole, J., Paynter, D., Shiogama, H., O'Connor, F. M., Robertson, E., Wiltshire, A., Andrews, T., Hannay, C., Miller, R., Nazarenko, L., Kirkevåg, A., Olivié, D., Fiedler, S., Lewinschal, A., Mackallah, C., Dix, M., Pincus, R., and Forster, P. M.: Effective radiative forcing and adjustments in CMIP6 models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9591–9618, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9591-2020, 2020. a
Sun, J., Zhang, K., Wan, H., Ma, P.-L., Tang, Q., and Zhang, S.: Impact of Nudging Strategy on the Climate Representativeness and Hindcast Skill of Constrained EAMv1 Simulations, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 3911–3933, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001831, 2019. a, b
Tegen, I., Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Bey, I., Schutgens, N., Stier, P., Watson-Parris, D., Stanelle, T., Schmidt, H., Rast, S., Kokkola, H., Schultz, M., Schroeder, S., Daskalakis, N., Barthel, S., Heinold, B., and Lohmann, U.: The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 1: Aerosol evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1643–1677, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1643-2019, 2019. a
Timmreck, C. and Schulz, M.: Significant dust simulation differences in nudged and climatological operation mode of the AGCM ECHAM, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D13202, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD004381, 2004. a
van Noije, T., Bergman, T., Le Sager, P., O'Donnell, D., Makkonen, R., Gonçalves-Ageitos, M., Döscher, R., Fladrich, U., von Hardenberg, J., Keskinen, J.-P., Korhonen, H., Laakso, A., Myriokefalitakis, S., Ollinaho, P., Pérez García-Pando, C., Reerink, T., Schrödner, R., Wyser, K., and Yang, S.: EC-Earth3-AerChem: a global climate model with interactive aerosols and atmospheric chemistry participating in CMIP6 , Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5637–5668, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5637-2021, 2021. a
Wan, H.: CDNC and ERFaer in E3SMv2: numerical experiment results from free-running present-day simulations, DataHub [data set], https://doi.org/10.25584/2481237, 2024. a
Wan, H. and Zhang, K.: Codes and scripts for an investigation of CDNC and ERFaer in E3SMv2, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14517254, 2024. a
Wan, H., Zhang, K., Rasch, P. J., Larson, V. E., Zeng, X., Zhang, S., and Dixon, R.: CondiDiag1.0: a flexible online diagnostic tool for conditional sampling and budget analysis in the E3SM atmosphere model (EAM), Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3205–3231, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3205-2022, 2022. a
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. and Penner, J. E.: Aerosol indirect forcing in a global model with particle nucleation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 239–260, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-239-2009, 2009. a
Wood, R., O, K.-T., Bretherton, C. S., Mohrmann, J., Albrecht, B. A., Zuidema, P., Ghate, V., Schwartz, C., Eloranta, E., Glienke, S., Shaw, R. A., Fugal, J., and Minnis, P.: Ultraclean Layers and Optically Thin Clouds in the Stratocumulus-to-Cumulus Transition. Part I: Observations, J. Atmos. Sci., 75, 1631 – 1652, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0213.1, 2018. a
Yenpure, A., Wan, H., and Geveci, B.: An animation of Arctic clouds simulated by E3SMv2, Zenodo [video supplement], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14523176, 2024a. a
Yenpure, A., Wan, H., and Geveci, B.: An animation of clouds over southeast China simulated by E3SMv2, Zenodo [video supplement], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14523263, 2024b. a
Zhang, K. and Wan, H.: CDNC and ERFaer in E3SMv2: numerical experiment results from nudged simulations under present-day and pre-industrial emission scenarios, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14518205, 2024. a
Zhang, K., O'Donnell, D., Kazil, J., Stier, P., Kinne, S., Lohmann, U., Ferrachat, S., Croft, B., Quaas, J., Wan, H., Rast, S., and Feichter, J.: The global aerosol-climate model ECHAM-HAM, version 2: sensitivity to improvements in process representations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 8911–8949, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-8911-2012, 2012. a
Zhang, K., Wan, H., Liu, X., Ghan, S. J., Kooperman, G. J., Ma, P.-L., Rasch, P. J., Neubauer, D., and Lohmann, U.: Technical Note: On the use of nudging for aerosol–climate model intercomparison studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 8631–8645, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-8631-2014, 2014. 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, 2022a. a, b, c, d, e
Zhang, S., Zhang, K., Wan, H., and Sun, J.: Further improvement and evaluation of nudging in the E3SM Atmosphere Model version 1 (EAMv1): simulations of the mean climate, weather events, and anthropogenic aerosol effects, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6787–6816, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6787-2022, 2022b. a, b
Short summary
In the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 2 (E3SMv2) and many other global models, the simulated anthropogenic aerosol effective radiative forcing is sensitive to the presence of clouds with very low droplet number concentrations. Numerical experiments presented in this paper indicate that mid- and high-latitude low-level stratus occurring under weak turbulence is a key cloud regime for investigating the causes of these very low cloud droplet number concentrations in E3SMv2.
In the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 2 (E3SMv2) and many other global models, the...
