Articles | Volume 18, issue 19
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-6671-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Special issue:
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-6671-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Model experiment description paper
| Highlight paper
| 
01 Oct 2025
Model experiment description paper | Highlight paper |
| 01 Oct 2025
| 01 Oct 2025
An evolving Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 7 (CMIP7) and Fast Track in support of future climate assessment
John P. Dunne
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
NOAA/OAR/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ, USA
Helene T. Hewitt
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Julie M. Arblaster
School of Earth, Atmosphere and Environment, Monash University, Monash, Australia
Frédéric Bonou
Laboratory of Physics and Applications (LPA), National University of Sciences, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics of Abomey (UNSTIM), Abomey, Benin
Olivier Boucher
Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace, Sorbonne Université/CNRS, Paris, France
Tereza Cavazos
Center for Scientific Research and Higher Education of Ensenada (CICESE), Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico
Beth Dingley
CMIP International Project Office, ECSAT, Harwell Science & Innovation Campus, Didcot, UK
Paul J. Durack
PCMDI, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA
Birgit Hassler
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
Martin Juckes
Department of Physics, University of Oxford, and UKRI STFC, Oxford, UK
Tomoki Miyakawa
Atmosphere and Ocean Research Institute, the University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Japan
Matt Mizielinski
Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK
Vaishali Naik
NOAA/OAR/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ, USA
Zebedee Nicholls
Climate Resource, Berlin, Germany
Energy, Climate and Environment Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), 2361 Laxenburg, Austria
School of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, the University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Eleanor O'Rourke
CMIP International Project Office, ECSAT, Harwell Science & Innovation Campus, Didcot, UK
Robert Pincus
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University, Palisades, NY, USA
Benjamin M. Sanderson
CICERO, Oslo, Norway
Isla R. Simpson
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
Karl E. Taylor
PCMDI, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA
Related authors
Forrest M. Hoffman, Birgit Hassler, Ranjini Swaminathan, Jared Lewis, Bouwe Andela, Nathaniel Collier, Dóra Hegedűs, Jiwoo Lee, Charlotte Pascoe, Mika Pflüger, Martina Stockhause, Paul Ullrich, Min Xu, Lisa Bock, Felicity Chun, Bettina K. Gier, Douglas I. Kelley, Axel Lauer, Julien Lenhardt, Manuel Schlund, Mohanan G. Sreeush, Katja Weigel, Ed Blockley, Rebecca Beadling, Romain Beucher, Demiso D. Dugassa, Valerio Lembo, Jianhua Lu, Swen Brands, Jerry Tjiputra, Elizaveta Malinina, Brian Mederios, Enrico Scoccimarro, Jeremy Walton, Philip Kershaw, André L. Marquez, Malcolm J. Roberts, Eleanor O’Rourke, Elisabeth Dingley, Briony Turner, Helene Hewitt, and John P. Dunne
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
As Earth system models become more complex, rapid and comprehensive evaluation through comparison with observational data is necessary. The upcoming Assessment Fast Track for the Seventh Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7) will require fast analysis. This paper describes a new Rapid Evaluation Framework (REF) that was developed for the Assessment Fast Track that will be run at the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) to inform the community about the performance of models.
Paul J. Durack, Karl E. Taylor, Peter J. Gleckler, Gerald A. Meehl, Bryan N. Lawrence, Curt Covey, Ronald J. Stouffer, Guillaume Levavasseur, Atef Ben-Nasser, Sebastien Denvil, Martina Stockhause, Jonathan M. Gregory, Martin Juckes, Sasha K. Ames, Fabrizio Antonio, David C. Bader, John P. Dunne, Daniel Ellis, Veronika Eyring, Sandro L. Fiore, Sylvie Joussaume, Philip Kershaw, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Michael Lautenschlager, Jiwoo Lee, Chris F. Mauzey, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Alessandra Nuzzo, Eleanor O’Rourke, Jeffrey Painter, Gerald L. Potter, Sven Rodriguez, and Dean N. Williams
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3729, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3729, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
CMIP6 was the most expansive and ambitious Model Intercomparison Project (MIP), the latest in a history, extending four decades. CMIP engaged a growing community focused on improving climate understanding, and quantifying and attributing observed climate change being experienced today. The project's profound impact is due to the combining the latest climate science and technology, enabling the latest-generation climate simulations and increasing community attention in every successive phase.
Yona Silvy, Thomas L. Frölicher, Jens Terhaar, Fortunat Joos, Friedrich A. Burger, Fabrice Lacroix, Myles Allen, Raffaele Bernardello, Laurent Bopp, Victor Brovkin, Jonathan R. Buzan, Patricia Cadule, Martin Dix, John Dunne, Pierre Friedlingstein, Goran Georgievski, Tomohiro Hajima, Stuart Jenkins, Michio Kawamiya, Nancy Y. Kiang, Vladimir Lapin, Donghyun Lee, Paul Lerner, Nadine Mengis, Estela A. Monteiro, David Paynter, Glen P. Peters, Anastasia Romanou, Jörg Schwinger, Sarah Sparrow, Eric Stofferahn, Jerry Tjiputra, Etienne Tourigny, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1591–1628, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1591-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1591-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The adaptive emission reduction approach is applied with Earth system models to generate temperature stabilization simulations. These simulations provide compatible emission pathways and budgets for a given warming level, uncovering uncertainty ranges previously missing in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project scenarios. These target-based emission-driven simulations offer a more coherent assessment across models for studying both the carbon cycle and its impacts under climate stabilization.
Benjamin M. Sanderson, Ben B. B. Booth, John Dunne, Veronika Eyring, Rosie A. Fisher, Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew J. Gidden, Tomohiro Hajima, Chris D. Jones, Colin G. Jones, Andrew King, Charles D. Koven, David M. Lawrence, Jason Lowe, Nadine Mengis, Glen P. Peters, Joeri Rogelj, Chris Smith, Abigail C. Snyder, Isla R. Simpson, Abigail L. S. Swann, Claudia Tebaldi, Tatiana Ilyina, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Roland Séférian, Bjørn H. Samset, Detlef van Vuuren, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8141–8172, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We discuss how, in order to provide more relevant guidance for climate policy, coordinated climate experiments should adopt a greater focus on simulations where Earth system models are provided with carbon emissions from fossil fuels together with land use change instructions, rather than past approaches that have largely focused on experiments with prescribed atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. We discuss how these goals might be achieved in coordinated climate modeling experiments.
Minjin Lee, Charles A. Stock, John P. Dunne, and Elena Shevliakova
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5191–5224, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5191-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5191-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Modeling global freshwater solid and nutrient loads, in both magnitude and form, is imperative for understanding emerging eutrophication problems. Such efforts, however, have been challenged by the difficulty of balancing details of freshwater biogeochemical processes with limited knowledge, input, and validation datasets. Here we develop a global freshwater model that resolves intertwined algae, solid, and nutrient dynamics and provide performance assessment against measurement-based estimates.
Jonathan D. Sharp, Andrea J. Fassbender, Brendan R. Carter, Gregory C. Johnson, Cristina Schultz, and John P. Dunne
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 4481–4518, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4481-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4481-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Dissolved oxygen content is a critical metric of ocean health. Recently, expanding fleets of autonomous platforms that measure oxygen in the ocean have produced a wealth of new data. We leverage machine learning to take advantage of this growing global dataset, producing a gridded data product of ocean interior dissolved oxygen at monthly resolution over nearly 2 decades. This work provides novel information for investigations of spatial, seasonal, and interannual variability in ocean oxygen.
Alban Planchat, Lester Kwiatkowski, Laurent Bopp, Olivier Torres, James R. Christian, Momme Butenschön, Tomas Lovato, Roland Séférian, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Olivier Aumont, Michio Watanabe, Akitomo Yamamoto, Andrew Yool, Tatiana Ilyina, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Kristen M. Krumhardt, Jörg Schwinger, Jerry Tjiputra, John P. Dunne, and Charles Stock
Biogeosciences, 20, 1195–1257, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1195-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1195-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Ocean alkalinity is critical to the uptake of atmospheric carbon and acidification in surface waters. We review the representation of alkalinity and the associated calcium carbonate cycle in Earth system models. While many parameterizations remain present in the latest generation of models, there is a general improvement in the simulated alkalinity distribution. This improvement is related to an increase in the export of biotic calcium carbonate, which closer resembles observations.
Colin Jones, Isaline Bossert, Donovan P. Dennis, Hazel Jeffery, Chris D. Jones, Torben Koenigk, Sina Loriani, Benjamin Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Klaus Wyser, Shuting Yang, Manabu Abe, Sebastian Bathiany, Pascale Braconnot, Victor Brovkin, Friedrich A. Burger, Patrica Cadule, Frederic S. Castruccio, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Andrea Dittus, Jonathan F. Donges, Friederike Fröb, Thomas Frölicher, Goran Georgievski, Chuncheng Guo, Aixue Hu, Peter Lawrence, Paul Lerner, José Licón-Saláiz, Bette Otto-Bliesner, Anastasia Romanou, Elena Shevliakova, Yona Silvy, Didier Swingedouw, Jerry Tjiputra, Jeremy Walton, Andy Wiltshire, Ricarda Winkelmann, Richard Wood, Tokuta Yokohata, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3604, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3604, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce a new Earth system model experiment protocol to help researchers understand how Earth might respond to positive, zero, and negative carbon emissions. This protocol enables different models to be compared following similar warming and cooling rates. Researchers use the models to explore how the Earth reacts to different climate futures, including the risk of tipping points being exceeded and whether changes can be reversed. The results will support improved long-term climate policy.
Ken S. Carslaw, Leighton A. Regayre, Ulrike Proske, Andrew Gettelman, David M. H. Sexton, Yun Qian, Lauren Marshall, Oliver Wild, Marcus van Lier-Walqui, Annika Oertel, Saloua Peatier, Ben Yang, Jill S. Johnson, Sihan Li, Daniel T. McCoy, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Christina J. Williamson, Gregory S. Elsaesser, Kuniko Yamazaki, and Ben B. B. Booth
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4341, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4341, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Short summary
A major challenge in climate science is reducing projection uncertainty despite advances in models and observational constraints. Perturbed parameter ensembles (PPEs) offer a powerful tool to explore and reduce uncertainty by revealing model weaknesses and guiding development. PPEs are now widely applied across climate systems and scales. We argue they should be prioritized alongside complexity and resolution in model resource planning.
Benjamin M. Sanderson, Victor Brovkin, Rosie A. Fisher, David Hohn, Tatiana Ilyina, Chris D. Jones, Torben Koenigk, Charles Koven, Hongmei Li, David M. Lawrence, Peter Lawrence, Spencer Liddicoat, Andrew H. MacDougall, Nadine Mengis, Zebedee Nicholls, Eleanor O'Rourke, Anastasia Romanou, Marit Sandstad, Jörg Schwinger, Roland Séférian, Lori T. Sentman, Isla R. Simpson, Chris Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Abigail L. S. Swann, Jerry Tjiputra, and Tilo Ziehn
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 5699–5724, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5699-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5699-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates how climate models warm in response to simplified carbon emissions trajectories, refining the understanding of climate reversibility and commitment. Metrics are defined for warming response to cumulative emissions and for the cessation of emissions or ramp-down to net-zero and net-negative levels. Results indicate that previous concentration-driven experiments may have overstated the Zero Emissions Commitment due to emissions rates exceeding historical levels.
Trevor Martin Sloughter, Zebedee Nicholls, Gang Tang, Thomas Kleinen, Zhen Zhang, and Joeri Rogelj
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3873, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3873, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
High resolution models of the earth system exhibit some disagreement and uncertainty on future methane emissions from natural sources, in particular wetlands, with some studies predicting wetlands alone could be very significant sources over the 21st century. Modelling these emissions as a response to global temperature is one option for simple models to approximate the climate impact of wetlands. The effect is a small increase in overall temperatures and a widening of the uncertainty range.
William J. Collins, Fiona M. O'Connor, Rachael E. Byrom, Øivind Hodnebrog, Patrick Jöckel, Mariano Mertens, Gunnar Myhre, Matthias Nützel, Dirk Olivié, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Laura Stecher, Larry W. Horowitz, Vaishali Naik, Gregory Faluvegi, Ulas Im, Lee T. Murray, Drew Shindell, Kostas Tsigaridis, Nathan Luke Abraham, and James Keeble
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 9031–9060, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-9031-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-9031-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We used 7 climate models that include atmospheric chemistry and find that in a scenario with weak controls on air quality, the warming effects (over 2015 to 2050) of decreases in ozone-depleting substances and increases in air quality pollutants are approximately equal and would make ozone the second highest contributor to warming over this period. We find that for stratospheric ozone recovery, the standard measure of climate effects underestimates a more comprehensive measure.
Blanca Ayarzagüena, Amy H. Butler, Peter Hitchcock, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Zac D. Lawrence, Wuhan Ning, Philip Rupp, Zheng Wu, Hilla Afargan-Gerstman, Natalia Calvo, Álvaro de la Cámara, Martin Jucker, Gerbrand Koren, Daniel De Maeseneire, Gloria L. Manney, Marisol Osman, Masakazu Taguchi, Cory Barton, Dong-Chang Hong, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Hera Kim, Jeff Knight, Piero Malguzzi, Daniele Mastrangelo, Jiyoung Oh, Inna Polichtchouk, Jadwiga H. Richter, Isla R. Simpson, Seok-Woo Son, Damien Specq, and Tim Stockdale
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3611, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3611, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Weather and Climate Dynamics (WCD).
Short summary
Short summary
Sudden Stratospheric Warmings (SSWs) are known to follow a sustained wave dissipation in the stratosphere, which depends on both the tropospheric and stratospheric states. However, the relative role of each state is still unclear. Using a new set of subseasonal to seasonal forecasts, we show that the stratospheric state does not drastically affect the precursors of three recent SSWs, but modulates the stratospheric wave activity, with impacts depending on SSW features.
Paul T. Griffiths, Laura J. Wilcox, Robert J. Allen, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Michael Prather, Alex Archibald, Florence Brown, Makoto Deushi, William Collins, Stephanie Fiedler, Naga Oshima, Lee T. Murray, Bjørn H. Samset, Chris Smith, Steven Turnock, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Paul J. Young
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 8289–8328, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-8289-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-8289-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Aerosol Chemistry Model Intercomparison Project (AerChemMIP) aimed to quantify the climate and air quality impacts of aerosols and chemically reactive gases. We review its contribution to AR6 (Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and the wider understanding of the role of these species in climate and climate change. We identify challenges and provide recommendations to improve the utility and uptake of climate model data, detailed summary tables of CMIP6 models, experiments, and emergent diagnostics.
Ross J. Herbert, Andrew I. L. Williams, Philipp Weiss, Duncan Watson-Parris, Elisabeth Dingley, Daniel Klocke, and Philip Stier
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 7789–7814, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-7789-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-7789-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds exist at scales that climate models struggle to represent, limiting our knowledge of how climate change may impact clouds. Here we use a new kilometer-scale global model representing an important step towards the necessary scale. We focus on how aerosol particles modify clouds, radiation, and precipitation. We find the magnitude and manner of responses tend to vary from region to region, highlighting the potential of global kilometer-scale simulations and a need to represent aerosols in climate models.
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.
Yue Li, Gang Tang, Eleanor O’Rourke, Samar Minallah, Martim Mas e Braga, Sophie Nowicki, Robin S. Smith, David M. Lawrence, George C. Hurtt, Daniele Peano, Gesa Meyer, Birgit Hassler, Jiafu Mao, Yongkang Xue, and Martin Juckes
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3207, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3207, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Land and Land Ice Theme Opportunities describe a list that contains 25 variable groups with 716 variables, which are potentially available to the broad scientific audience for performing analysis in land-atmosphere coupling, hydrological processes and freshwater systems, glacier and ice sheet mass balance and their influence on the sea levels, land use, and plant phenology.
Alex C. Ruane, Charlotte L. Pascoe, Claas Teichmann, David J. Brayshaw, Carlo Buontempo, Ibrahima Diouf, Jesus Fernandez, Paula L. M. Gonzalez, Birgit Hassler, Vanessa Hernaman, Ulas Im, Doroteaciro Iovino, Martin Juckes, Iréne L. Lake, Timothy Lam, Xiaomao Lin, Jiafu Mao, Negin Nazarian, Sylvie Parey, Indrani Roy, Wan-Ling Tseng, Briony Turner, Andrew Wiebe, Lei Zhao, and Damaris Zurell
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3408, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3408, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes how the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project organized its 7th phase (CMIP7) to encourage the production of Earth system model outputs relevant for impacts and adaptation. Community engagement identified 13 opportunities for application across human and natural systems, 60 variable groups and 539 unique variables. We also show how simulations can more efficiently meet applications needs by targeting appropriate resolution, time slices, experiments and variable groups.
Mara Y. McPartland, Tomas Lovato, Charles D. Koven, Jamie D. Wilson, Briony Turner, Colleen M. Petrik, José Licón-Saláiz, Fang Li, Fanny Lhardy, Jaclyn Clement Kinney, Michio Kawamiya, Birgit Hassler, Nathan P. Gillett, Cheikh Modou Noreyni Fall, Christopher Danek, Chris M. Brierley, Ana Bastos, and Oliver Andrews
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3246, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3246, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) is an international consortium of climate modeling groups that produce coordinated experiments in order to evaluate human influence on the climate and test knowledge of Earth systems. This paper describes the data requested for Earth systems research in CMIP7. We detail the request for model output of the carbon cycle, the flows of energy among the atmosphere, land and the oceans, and interactions between these and the global climate.
Forrest M. Hoffman, Birgit Hassler, Ranjini Swaminathan, Jared Lewis, Bouwe Andela, Nathaniel Collier, Dóra Hegedűs, Jiwoo Lee, Charlotte Pascoe, Mika Pflüger, Martina Stockhause, Paul Ullrich, Min Xu, Lisa Bock, Felicity Chun, Bettina K. Gier, Douglas I. Kelley, Axel Lauer, Julien Lenhardt, Manuel Schlund, Mohanan G. Sreeush, Katja Weigel, Ed Blockley, Rebecca Beadling, Romain Beucher, Demiso D. Dugassa, Valerio Lembo, Jianhua Lu, Swen Brands, Jerry Tjiputra, Elizaveta Malinina, Brian Mederios, Enrico Scoccimarro, Jeremy Walton, Philip Kershaw, André L. Marquez, Malcolm J. Roberts, Eleanor O’Rourke, Elisabeth Dingley, Briony Turner, Helene Hewitt, and John P. Dunne
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2685, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
As Earth system models become more complex, rapid and comprehensive evaluation through comparison with observational data is necessary. The upcoming Assessment Fast Track for the Seventh Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7) will require fast analysis. This paper describes a new Rapid Evaluation Framework (REF) that was developed for the Assessment Fast Track that will be run at the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) to inform the community about the performance of models.
Beth Dingley, James A. Anstey, Marta Abalos, Carsten Abraham, Tommi Bergman, Lisa Bock, Sonya Fiddes, Birgit Hassler, Ryan J. Kramer, Fei Luo, Fiona M. O'Connor, Petr Šácha, Isla R. Simpson, Laura J. Wilcox, and Mark D. Zelinka
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3189, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3189, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
This manuscript defines as a list of variables and scientific opportunities which are requested from the CMIP7 Assessment Fast Track to address open atmospheric science questions. The list reflects the output of a large public community engagement effort, coordinated across autumn 2025 through to summer 2025.
Baylor Fox-Kemper, Patricia DeRepentigny, Anne Marie Treguier, Christian Stepanek, Eleanor O’Rourke, Chloe Mackallah, Alberto Meucci, Yevgeny Aksenov, Paul J. Durack, Nicole Feldl, Vanessa Hernaman, Céline Heuzé, Doroteaciro Iovino, Gaurav Madan, André L. Marquez, François Massonnet, Jenny Mecking, Dhrubajyoti Samanta, Patrick C. Taylor, Wan-Ling Tseng, and Martin Vancoppenolle
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3083, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3083, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The earth system model variables needed for studies of the ocean and sea ice are prioritized and requested.
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.
Piers M. Forster, Chris Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Christophe Cassou, Mathias Hauser, Zeke Hausfather, June-Yi Lee, Matthew D. Palmer, Karina von Schuckmann, Aimée B. A. Slangen, Sophie Szopa, Blair Trewin, Jeongeun Yun, Nathan P. Gillett, Stuart Jenkins, H. Damon Matthews, Krishnan Raghavan, Aurélien Ribes, Joeri Rogelj, Debbie Rosen, Xuebin Zhang, Myles Allen, Lara Aleluia Reis, Robbie M. Andrew, Richard A. Betts, Alex Borger, Jiddu A. Broersma, Samantha N. Burgess, Lijing Cheng, Pierre Friedlingstein, Catia M. Domingues, Marco Gambarini, Thomas Gasser, Johannes Gütschow, Masayoshi Ishii, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel E. Killick, Paul B. Krummel, Aurélien Liné, Didier P. Monselesan, Colin Morice, Jens Mühle, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Jan C. Minx, Matthew Rigby, Robert Rohde, Abhishek Savita, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Peter Thorne, Christopher Wells, Luke M. Western, Guido R. van der Werf, Susan E. Wijffels, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 2641–2680, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-2641-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-2641-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In a rapidly changing climate, evidence-based decision-making benefits from up-to-date and timely information. Here we compile monitoring datasets to track real-world changes over time. To make our work relevant to policymakers, we follow methods from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Human activities are increasing the Earth's energy imbalance and driving faster sea-level rise compared to the IPCC assessment.
Aytaç Paçal, Birgit Hassler, Katja Weigel, Miguel-Ángel Fernández-Torres, Gustau Camps-Valls, and Veronika Eyring
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2460, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2460, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Heatwaves are among the deadliest natural hazards, yet their causes and changes over time are not fully understood. We analyzed European heatwaves using a machine learning method that detects atmospheric patterns from these data. Our findings show that recent summer heatwaves differ from historical ones, indicating a shift in atmospheric dynamics consistent with climate change. This approach improves our understanding of the temporal evolution of heatwaves.
Anna Zehrung, Andrew D. King, Zebedee Nicholls, Mark D. Zelinka, and Malte Meinshausen
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2252, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2252, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Gregory method is a common approach for calculating the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS). However, studies which apply this method lack transparency in how model data is processed prior to calculating the ECS, inhibiting replicability. Different choices of global and annual mean weighting, anomaly calculation, and linear regression fit can affect the ECS estimates. We investigate the impact of these choices and propose a standardised method for future ECS calculations.
Sauvik Santra, Shubha Verma, Shubham Patel, Olivier Boucher, and Mathew Koll Roxy
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2302, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2302, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Short summary
Uneven spatial changes in Indian monsoon rainfall are linked to tiny airborne particles called aerosols, both human-made and natural (like dust). Using a high-resolution climate model, we show how persistent weakening and strengthening patterns in rainfall are driven by spatially varying aerosols. Reducing human-made aerosols may ease rainfall shortages in some areas but worsen excesses in others. These insights are key for better water management and policy planning.
David Storkey, Pierre Mathiot, Michael J. Bell, Dan Copsey, Catherine Guiavarc'h, Helene T. Hewitt, Jeff Ridley, and Malcolm J. Roberts
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2725–2745, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2725-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2725-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Southern Ocean is a key region of the world ocean in the context of climate change studies. We show that the Met Office Hadley Centre coupled model with intermediate ocean resolution struggles to accurately simulate the Southern Ocean. Increasing the frictional drag that the seafloor exerts on ocean currents and introducing a representation of unresolved ocean eddies both appear to reduce the large-scale biases in this model.
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.
Susanne Baur, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, and Laurent Terray
Earth Syst. Dynam., 16, 667–681, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-667-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-667-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) could be used alongside mitigation to reduce global warming. Previous studies suggest that more atmospheric CO2 is taken up when SAI is deployed. Here, we look at the entire SAI deployment from start to after termination. We show how the initial CO2 uptake benefit, and hence lower mitigation burden, is reduced in later stages of SAI, where the reduction in natural CO2 uptake turns into an additional mitigation burden.
Lukas Lindenlaub, Katja Weigel, Birgit Hassler, Colin Jones, and Veronika Eyring
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1517, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1517, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores changes in drought characteristic based on projections by 18 different Earth system models. Their performance is evaluated by comparing historical simulations to observation based reanalysis. The analysis of a standardized drought index under different future scenarios revealed that the harvest area that is projected to experience extreme drought conditions towards the end of this century ranges from 10 % to 40 % depending on the emission scenario.
William Lamb, Robbie Andrew, Matthew Jones, Zebedee Nicholls, Glen Peters, Chris Smith, Marielle Saunois, Giacomo Grassi, Julia Pongratz, Steven Smith, Francesco Tubiello, Monica Crippa, Matthew Gidden, Pierre Friedlingstein, Jan Minx, and Piers Forster
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-188, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-188, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores why global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions estimates vary. Key reasons include different coverage of gases and sectors, varying definitions of anthropogenic land use change emissions, and the Paris Agreement not covering all emission sources. The study highlights three main ways emissions data is reported, each with different objectives and resulting in varying global emission totals. It emphasizes the need for transparency in choosing datasets and setting assessment scopes.
Norman J. Steinert and Benjamin M. Sanderson
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1714, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1714, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we explore how carbon emissions from thawing permafrost, known as the permafrost carbon feedback, affect two important climate metrics: how much the Earth warms per amount of carbon we emit, and how much warming continues after we stop emitting carbon. Our study tackles a major gap in how we estimate future climate change. Using simplified climate models, we find a generalizable relationship between the permafrost carbon feedback and its additional warming impact on climate.
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.
Marit Sandstad, Norman Julius Steinert, Susanne Baur, and Benjamin Mark Sanderson
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1038, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1038, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In this article we present METEORv1.0.0, a climate model emulator, that can be trained on full spacially resolved and widely available climate model data to reproduce climate variables, and make predictions from unseen emission trajectories. The methodology which consists of identifying patterns associated with various timescales of impact for one or more forcers using idealised experiments and anomaly calculations. Results for precipitation and temperature show good model performance.
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.
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.
Jingyu Wang, Gabriel Chiodo, Timofei Sukhodolov, Blanca Ayarzagüena, William T. Ball, Mohamadou Diallo, Birgit Hassler, James Keeble, Peer Nowack, Clara Orbe, and Sandro Vattioni
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-340, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-340, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We analyzed the ozone response under elevated CO2 using the data from CMIP6 DECK experiments. We then looked at the relations between ozone response and temperature and circulation changes to identify drivers of the ozone change. The climate feedback of ozone is investigated by doing offline calculations and comparing models with and without interactive chemistry. We find that ozone-climate interactions are important for Earth System Models, thus should be considered in future model development.
Irina Melnikova, Philippe Ciais, Katsumasa Tanaka, Hideo Shiogama, Kaoru Tachiiri, Tokuta Yokohata, and Olivier Boucher
Earth Syst. Dynam., 16, 257–273, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-257-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-16-257-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Reducing non-CO2 greenhouse gases is important alongside CO2 for climate mitigation. Here, we look at how reducing their emissions compares to reducing CO2 using an Earth system model. While both types of gases contribute to warming, their regional climate impacts differ. Besides, the carbon cycle responds differently depending on whether climate change is driven by CO2 or non-CO2 gases. Considering both types of gases is important for carbon cycle analysis and climate mitigation strategies.
Detlef van Vuuren, Brian O'Neill, Claudia Tebaldi, Louise Chini, Pierre Friedlingstein, Tomoko Hasegawa, Keywan Riahi, Benjamin Sanderson, Bala Govindasamy, Nico Bauer, Veronika Eyring, Cheikh Fall, Katja Frieler, Matthew Gidden, Laila Gohar, Andrew Jones, Andrew King, Reto Knutti, Elmar Kriegler, Peter Lawrence, Chris Lennard, Jason Lowe, Camila Mathison, Shahbaz Mehmood, Luciana Prado, Qiang Zhang, Steven Rose, Alexander Ruane, Carl-Friederich Schleussner, Roland Seferian, Jana Sillmann, Chris Smith, Anna Sörensson, Swapna Panickal, Kaoru Tachiiri, Naomi Vaughan, Saritha Vishwanathan, Tokuta Yokohata, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a set of six plausible 21st century emission scenarios, and their multi-century extensions, that will be used by the international community of climate modeling centers to produce the next generation of climate projections. These projections will support climate, impact and mitigation researchers, provide information to practitioners to address future risks from climate change, and contribute to policymakers’ considerations of the trade-offs among various levels of mitigation.
Xavier Faïn, Sophie Szopa, Vaishali Naïk, Patricia Martinerie, David M. Etheridge, Rachael H. Rhodes, Cathy M. Trudinger, Vasilii V. Petrenko, Kévin Fourteau, and Philip Place
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1105–1119, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1105-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1105-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon monoxide (CO) plays a crucial role in the atmosphere's oxidizing capacity. In this study, we analyse how historical (1850–2014) [CO] outputs from state-of-the-art global chemistry–climate models over Greenland and Antarctica are able to capture both absolute values and trends recorded in multi-site ice archives. A disparity in [CO] growth rates emerges in the Northern Hemisphere between models and observations from 1920–1975 CE, possibly linked to uncertainties in CO emission factors.
Catherine Guiavarc'h, David Storkey, Adam T. Blaker, Ed Blockley, Alex Megann, Helene Hewitt, Michael J. Bell, Daley Calvert, Dan Copsey, Bablu Sinha, Sophia Moreton, Pierre Mathiot, and Bo An
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 377–403, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-377-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-377-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Global Ocean and Sea Ice configuration version 9 (GOSI9) is the new UK hierarchy of model configurations based on the Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean (NEMO) and available at three resolutions. It will be used for various applications, e.g. weather forecasting and climate prediction. It improves upon the previous version by reducing global temperature and salinity biases and enhancing the representation of Arctic sea ice and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.
Paul J. Durack, Karl E. Taylor, Peter J. Gleckler, Gerald A. Meehl, Bryan N. Lawrence, Curt Covey, Ronald J. Stouffer, Guillaume Levavasseur, Atef Ben-Nasser, Sebastien Denvil, Martina Stockhause, Jonathan M. Gregory, Martin Juckes, Sasha K. Ames, Fabrizio Antonio, David C. Bader, John P. Dunne, Daniel Ellis, Veronika Eyring, Sandro L. Fiore, Sylvie Joussaume, Philip Kershaw, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Michael Lautenschlager, Jiwoo Lee, Chris F. Mauzey, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Alessandra Nuzzo, Eleanor O’Rourke, Jeffrey Painter, Gerald L. Potter, Sven Rodriguez, and Dean N. Williams
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3729, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3729, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
CMIP6 was the most expansive and ambitious Model Intercomparison Project (MIP), the latest in a history, extending four decades. CMIP engaged a growing community focused on improving climate understanding, and quantifying and attributing observed climate change being experienced today. The project's profound impact is due to the combining the latest climate science and technology, enabling the latest-generation climate simulations and increasing community attention in every successive phase.
Kevin Wolf, Nicolas Bellouin, Olivier Boucher, Susanne Rohs, and Yun Li
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 157–181, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-157-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-157-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
ERA5 atmospheric reanalysis and airborne in situ observations from IAGOS are compared in terms of the representation of the contrail formation potential and the presence of supersaturation. Differences are traced back to biases in ERA5 relative humidity fields. Those biases are addressed by applying a quantile mapping technique that significantly improved contrail estimation based on post-processed ERA5 data.
Yona Silvy, Thomas L. Frölicher, Jens Terhaar, Fortunat Joos, Friedrich A. Burger, Fabrice Lacroix, Myles Allen, Raffaele Bernardello, Laurent Bopp, Victor Brovkin, Jonathan R. Buzan, Patricia Cadule, Martin Dix, John Dunne, Pierre Friedlingstein, Goran Georgievski, Tomohiro Hajima, Stuart Jenkins, Michio Kawamiya, Nancy Y. Kiang, Vladimir Lapin, Donghyun Lee, Paul Lerner, Nadine Mengis, Estela A. Monteiro, David Paynter, Glen P. Peters, Anastasia Romanou, Jörg Schwinger, Sarah Sparrow, Eric Stofferahn, Jerry Tjiputra, Etienne Tourigny, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1591–1628, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1591-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1591-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The adaptive emission reduction approach is applied with Earth system models to generate temperature stabilization simulations. These simulations provide compatible emission pathways and budgets for a given warming level, uncovering uncertainty ranges previously missing in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project scenarios. These target-based emission-driven simulations offer a more coherent assessment across models for studying both the carbon cycle and its impacts under climate stabilization.
Chris Smith, Donald P. Cummins, Hege-Beate Fredriksen, Zebedee Nicholls, Malte Meinshausen, Myles Allen, Stuart Jenkins, Nicholas Leach, Camilla Mathison, and Antti-Ilari Partanen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8569–8592, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate projections are only useful if the underlying models that produce them are well calibrated and can reproduce observed climate change. We formalise a software package that calibrates the open-source FaIR simple climate model to full-complexity Earth system models. Observations, including historical warming, and assessments of key climate variables such as that of climate sensitivity are used to constrain the model output.
Benjamin M. Sanderson, Ben B. B. Booth, John Dunne, Veronika Eyring, Rosie A. Fisher, Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew J. Gidden, Tomohiro Hajima, Chris D. Jones, Colin G. Jones, Andrew King, Charles D. Koven, David M. Lawrence, Jason Lowe, Nadine Mengis, Glen P. Peters, Joeri Rogelj, Chris Smith, Abigail C. Snyder, Isla R. Simpson, Abigail L. S. Swann, Claudia Tebaldi, Tatiana Ilyina, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Roland Séférian, Bjørn H. Samset, Detlef van Vuuren, and Sönke Zaehle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8141–8172, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We discuss how, in order to provide more relevant guidance for climate policy, coordinated climate experiments should adopt a greater focus on simulations where Earth system models are provided with carbon emissions from fossil fuels together with land use change instructions, rather than past approaches that have largely focused on experiments with prescribed atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. We discuss how these goals might be achieved in coordinated climate modeling experiments.
Colin G. Jones, Fanny Adloff, Ben B. B. Booth, Peter M. Cox, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, Katja Frieler, Helene T. Hewitt, Hazel A. Jeffery, Sylvie Joussaume, Torben Koenigk, Bryan N. Lawrence, Eleanor O'Rourke, Malcolm J. Roberts, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Samuel Somot, Pier Luigi Vidale, Detlef van Vuuren, Mario Acosta, Mats Bentsen, Raffaele Bernardello, Richard Betts, Ed Blockley, Julien Boé, Tom Bracegirdle, Pascale Braconnot, Victor Brovkin, Carlo Buontempo, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Markus Donat, Italo Epicoco, Pete Falloon, Sandro Fiore, Thomas Frölicher, Neven S. Fučkar, Matthew J. Gidden, Helge F. Goessling, Rune Grand Graversen, Silvio Gualdi, José M. Gutiérrez, Tatiana Ilyina, Daniela Jacob, Chris D. Jones, Martin Juckes, Elizabeth Kendon, Erik Kjellström, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Michael Obersteiner, Pierre Regnier, Romain Roehrig, David Salas y Mélia, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Michael Schulz, Enrico Scoccimarro, Laurent Terray, Hannes Thiemann, Richard A. Wood, Shuting Yang, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1319–1351, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1319-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a number of priority areas for the international climate research community to address over the coming decade. Advances in these areas will both increase our understanding of past and future Earth system change, including the societal and environmental impacts of this change, and deliver significantly improved scientific support to international climate policy, such as future IPCC assessments and the UNFCCC Global Stocktake.
Audran Borella, Olivier Boucher, Keith P. Shine, Marc Stettler, Katsumasa Tanaka, Roger Teoh, and Nicolas Bellouin
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 9401–9417, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9401-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-9401-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This work studies how to compare the climate impact of the CO2 emitted and contrails formed by a flight. This is applied to contrail avoidance strategies that would decrease climate impact of flights by changing the trajectory of aircraft to avoid persistent contrail formation, at the risk of increasing CO2 emissions. We find that different comparison methods lead to different quantification of the total climate impact of a flight but lead to similar decisions of whether to reroute an aircraft.
Marit Sandstad, Borgar Aamaas, Ane Nordlie Johansen, Marianne Tronstad Lund, Glen Philip Peters, Bjørn Hallvard Samset, Benjamin Mark Sanderson, and Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6589–6625, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6589-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6589-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The CICERO-SCM has existed as a Fortran model since 1999 that calculates the radiative forcing and concentrations from emissions and is an upwelling diffusion energy balance model of the ocean that calculates temperature change. In this paper, we describe an updated version ported to Python and publicly available at https://github.com/ciceroOslo/ciceroscm (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10548720). This version contains functionality for parallel runs and automatic calibration.
Saloua Peatier, Benjamin M. Sanderson, and Laurent Terray
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 987–1014, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-987-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-987-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The calibration of Earth system model parameters is a high-dimensionality problem subject to data, time, and computational constraints. In this study, we propose a practical solution for finding diverse near-optimal solutions. We argue that the effective degrees of freedom in the model performance response to parameter input is relatively small. Comparably performing parameter configurations exist and showcase different trade-offs in model errors, providing insights for model development.
Alkiviadis Kalisoras, Aristeidis K. Georgoulias, Dimitris Akritidis, Robert J. Allen, Vaishali Naik, Chaincy Kuo, Sophie Szopa, Pierre Nabat, Dirk Olivié, Twan van Noije, Philippe Le Sager, David Neubauer, Naga Oshima, Jane Mulcahy, Larry W. Horowitz, and Prodromos Zanis
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 7837–7872, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7837-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-7837-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Effective radiative forcing (ERF) is a metric for estimating how human activities and natural agents change the energy flow into and out of the Earth’s climate system. We investigate the anthropogenic aerosol ERF, and we estimate the contribution of individual processes to the total ERF using simulations from Earth system models within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). Our findings highlight that aerosol–cloud interactions drive ERF variability during the last 150 years.
Minjin Lee, Charles A. Stock, John P. Dunne, and Elena Shevliakova
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5191–5224, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5191-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5191-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Modeling global freshwater solid and nutrient loads, in both magnitude and form, is imperative for understanding emerging eutrophication problems. Such efforts, however, have been challenged by the difficulty of balancing details of freshwater biogeochemical processes with limited knowledge, input, and validation datasets. Here we develop a global freshwater model that resolves intertwined algae, solid, and nutrient dynamics and provide performance assessment against measurement-based estimates.
Malte Meinshausen, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Kathleen Beyer, Greg Bodeker, Olivier Boucher, Josep G. Canadell, John S. Daniel, Aïda Diongue-Niang, Fatima Driouech, Erich Fischer, Piers Forster, Michael Grose, Gerrit Hansen, Zeke Hausfather, Tatiana Ilyina, Jarmo S. Kikstra, Joyce Kimutai, Andrew D. King, June-Yi Lee, Chris Lennard, Tabea Lissner, Alexander Nauels, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Gian-Kasper Plattner, Hans Pörtner, Joeri Rogelj, Maisa Rojas, Joyashree Roy, Bjørn H. Samset, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Sonia Seneviratne, Christopher J. Smith, Sophie Szopa, Adelle Thomas, Diana Urge-Vorsatz, Guus J. M. Velders, Tokuta Yokohata, Tilo Ziehn, and Zebedee Nicholls
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4533–4559, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4533-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4533-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The scientific community is considering new scenarios to succeed RCPs and SSPs for the next generation of Earth system model runs to project future climate change. To contribute to that effort, we reflect on relevant policy and scientific research questions and suggest categories for representative emission pathways. These categories are tailored to the Paris Agreement long-term temperature goal, high-risk outcomes in the absence of further climate policy and worlds “that could have been”.
Piers M. Forster, Chris Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Bradley Hall, Mathias Hauser, Aurélien Ribes, Debbie Rosen, Nathan P. Gillett, Matthew D. Palmer, Joeri Rogelj, Karina von Schuckmann, Blair Trewin, Myles Allen, Robbie Andrew, Richard A. Betts, Alex Borger, Tim Boyer, Jiddu A. Broersma, Carlo Buontempo, Samantha Burgess, Chiara Cagnazzo, Lijing Cheng, Pierre Friedlingstein, Andrew Gettelman, Johannes Gütschow, Masayoshi Ishii, Stuart Jenkins, Xin Lan, Colin Morice, Jens Mühle, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel E. Killick, Paul B. Krummel, Jan C. Minx, Gunnar Myhre, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Sophie Szopa, Peter Thorne, Mahesh V. M. Kovilakam, Elisa Majamäki, Jukka-Pekka Jalkanen, Margreet van Marle, Rachel M. Hoesly, Robert Rohde, Dominik Schumacher, Guido van der Werf, Russell Vose, Kirsten Zickfeld, Xuebin Zhang, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2625–2658, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2625-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2625-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper tracks some key indicators of global warming through time, from 1850 through to the end of 2023. It is designed to give an authoritative estimate of global warming to date and its causes. We find that in 2023, global warming reached 1.3 °C and is increasing at over 0.2 °C per decade. This is caused by all-time-high greenhouse gas emissions.
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.
Sidiki Sanogo, Olivier Boucher, Nicolas Bellouin, Audran Borella, Kevin Wolf, and Susanne Rohs
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 5495–5511, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5495-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5495-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Relative humidity relative to ice (RHi) is a key variable in the formation of cirrus clouds and contrails. This study shows that the properties of the probability density function of RHi differ between the tropics and higher latitudes. In line with RHi and temperature variability, aircraft are likely to produce more contrails with bioethanol and liquid hydrogen as fuel. The impact of this fuel change decreases with decreasing pressure levels but increases from high latitudes to the tropics.
Bjorn Stevens, Stefan Adami, Tariq Ali, Hartwig Anzt, Zafer Aslan, Sabine Attinger, Jaana Bäck, Johanna Baehr, Peter Bauer, Natacha Bernier, Bob Bishop, Hendryk Bockelmann, Sandrine Bony, Guy Brasseur, David N. Bresch, Sean Breyer, Gilbert Brunet, Pier Luigi Buttigieg, Junji Cao, Christelle Castet, Yafang Cheng, Ayantika Dey Choudhury, Deborah Coen, Susanne Crewell, Atish Dabholkar, Qing Dai, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Dale Durran, Ayoub El Gaidi, Charlie Ewen, Eleftheria Exarchou, Veronika Eyring, Florencia Falkinhoff, David Farrell, Piers M. Forster, Ariane Frassoni, Claudia Frauen, Oliver Fuhrer, Shahzad Gani, Edwin Gerber, Debra Goldfarb, Jens Grieger, Nicolas Gruber, Wilco Hazeleger, Rolf Herken, Chris Hewitt, Torsten Hoefler, Huang-Hsiung Hsu, Daniela Jacob, Alexandra Jahn, Christian Jakob, Thomas Jung, Christopher Kadow, In-Sik Kang, Sarah Kang, Karthik Kashinath, Katharina Kleinen-von Königslöw, Daniel Klocke, Uta Kloenne, Milan Klöwer, Chihiro Kodama, Stefan Kollet, Tobias Kölling, Jenni Kontkanen, Steve Kopp, Michal Koran, Markku Kulmala, Hanna Lappalainen, Fakhria Latifi, Bryan Lawrence, June Yi Lee, Quentin Lejeun, Christian Lessig, Chao Li, Thomas Lippert, Jürg Luterbacher, Pekka Manninen, Jochem Marotzke, Satoshi Matsouoka, Charlotte Merchant, Peter Messmer, Gero Michel, Kristel Michielsen, Tomoki Miyakawa, Jens Müller, Ramsha Munir, Sandeep Narayanasetti, Ousmane Ndiaye, Carlos Nobre, Achim Oberg, Riko Oki, Tuba Özkan-Haller, Tim Palmer, Stan Posey, Andreas Prein, Odessa Primus, Mike Pritchard, Julie Pullen, Dian Putrasahan, Johannes Quaas, Krishnan Raghavan, Venkatachalam Ramaswamy, Markus Rapp, Florian Rauser, Markus Reichstein, Aromar Revi, Sonakshi Saluja, Masaki Satoh, Vera Schemann, Sebastian Schemm, Christina Schnadt Poberaj, Thomas Schulthess, Cath Senior, Jagadish Shukla, Manmeet Singh, Julia Slingo, Adam Sobel, Silvina Solman, Jenna Spitzer, Philip Stier, Thomas Stocker, Sarah Strock, Hang Su, Petteri Taalas, John Taylor, Susann Tegtmeier, Georg Teutsch, Adrian Tompkins, Uwe Ulbrich, Pier-Luigi Vidale, Chien-Ming Wu, Hao Xu, Najibullah Zaki, Laure Zanna, Tianjun Zhou, and Florian Ziemen
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2113–2122, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To manage Earth in the Anthropocene, new tools, new institutions, and new forms of international cooperation will be required. Earth Virtualization Engines is proposed as an international federation of centers of excellence to empower all people to respond to the immense and urgent challenges posed by climate change.
Kevin Wolf, Nicolas Bellouin, and Olivier Boucher
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 5009–5024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5009-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-5009-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The contrail formation potential and its tempo-spatial distribution are estimated for the North Atlantic flight corridor. Meteorological conditions of temperature and relative humidity are taken from the ERA5 re-analysis and IAGOS. Based on IAGOS flight tracks, crossing length, size, orientation, frequency of occurrence, and overlap of persistent contrail formation areas are determined. The presented conclusions might provide a guide for statistical flight track optimization to reduce contrails.
Daniele Visioni, Alan Robock, Jim Haywood, Matthew Henry, Simone Tilmes, Douglas G. MacMartin, Ben Kravitz, Sarah J. Doherty, John Moore, Chris Lennard, Shingo Watanabe, Helene Muri, Ulrike Niemeier, Olivier Boucher, Abu Syed, Temitope S. Egbebiyi, Roland Séférian, and Ilaria Quaglia
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2583–2596, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2583-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2583-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes a new experimental protocol for the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). In it, we describe the details of a new simulation of sunlight reflection using the stratospheric aerosols that climate models are supposed to run, and we explain the reasons behind each choice we made when defining the protocol.
Susanne Baur, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, and Laurent Terray
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 307–322, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-307-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-307-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Most solar radiation modification (SRM) simulations assume no physical coupling between mitigation and SRM. We analyze the impact of SRM on photovoltaic (PV) and concentrated solar power (CSP) and find that almost all regions have reduced PV and CSP potential compared to a mitigated or unmitigated scenario, especially in the middle and high latitudes. This suggests that SRM could pose challenges for meeting energy demands with solar renewable resources.
Stephanie Fiedler, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Christopher J. Smith, Paul Griffiths, Ryan J. Kramer, Toshihiko Takemura, Robert J. Allen, Ulas Im, Matthew Kasoar, Angshuman Modak, Steven Turnock, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Duncan Watson-Parris, Daniel M. Westervelt, Laura J. Wilcox, Alcide Zhao, William J. Collins, Michael Schulz, Gunnar Myhre, and Piers M. Forster
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2387–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate scientists want to better understand modern climate change. Thus, climate model experiments are performed and compared. The results of climate model experiments differ, as assessed in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report. This article gives insights into the challenges and outlines opportunities for further improving the understanding of climate change. It is based on views of a group of experts in atmospheric composition–climate interactions.
Marika M. Holland, Cecile Hannay, John Fasullo, Alexandra Jahn, Jennifer E. Kay, Michael Mills, Isla R. Simpson, William Wieder, Peter Lawrence, Erik Kluzek, and David Bailey
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1585–1602, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1585-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1585-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate evolves in response to changing forcings, as prescribed in simulations. Models and forcings are updated over time to reflect new understanding. This makes it difficult to attribute simulation differences to either model or forcing changes. Here we present new simulations which enable the separation of model structure and forcing influence between two widely used simulation sets. Results indicate a strong influence of aerosol emission uncertainty on historical climate.
Woon Mi Kim, Santos J. González-Rojí, Isla R. Simpson, and Daniel Kennedy
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-252, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-252, 2024
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates temporal characteristics and typical circulation conditions associated with onsets and terminations of soil moisture droughts in Europe. More understanding of drought onsets and terminations can aid in improving early predictions for devastating intense droughts.
Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 415–430, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-415-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-415-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Remapping gridded data in a way that preserves the conservative properties of the climate system can be essential in coupling model components and for accurate assessment of the system’s energy and mass constituents. Remapping packages capable of handling a wide variety of grids can, for some common grids, calculate remapping weights that are somewhat inaccurate. Correcting for these errors, guidelines are provided to ensure conservation when the weights are used in practice.
Hamza Ahsan, Hailong Wang, Jingbo Wu, Mingxuan Wu, Steven J. Smith, Susanne Bauer, Harrison Suchyta, Dirk Olivié, Gunnar Myhre, Hitoshi Matsui, Huisheng Bian, Jean-François Lamarque, Ken Carslaw, Larry Horowitz, Leighton Regayre, Mian Chin, Michael Schulz, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Toshihiko Takemura, and Vaishali Naik
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14779–14799, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14779-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14779-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We examine the impact of the assumed effective height of SO2 injection, SO2 and BC emission seasonality, and the assumed fraction of SO2 emissions injected as SO4 on climate and chemistry model results. We find that the SO2 injection height has a large impact on surface SO2 concentrations and, in some models, radiative flux. These assumptions are a
hiddensource of inter-model variability and may be leading to bias in some climate model results.
Jon Seddon, Ag Stephens, Matthew S. Mizielinski, Pier Luigi Vidale, and Malcolm J. Roberts
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6689–6700, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6689-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6689-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The PRIMAVERA project aimed to develop a new generation of advanced global climate models. The large volume of data generated was uploaded to a central analysis facility (CAF) and was analysed by 100 PRIMAVERA scientists there. We describe how the PRIMAVERA project used the CAF's facilities to enable users to analyse this large dataset. We believe that similar, multi-institute, big-data projects could also use a CAF to efficiently share, organise and analyse large volumes of data.
Kevin Wolf, Nicolas Bellouin, and Olivier Boucher
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14003–14037, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14003-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14003-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Cirrus and contrails considerably impact Earth's energy budget. Such ice clouds can have a positive (warming) or negative (cooling) net radiative effect (RE), which depends on cloud and ambient properties. The effect of eight parameters on the cloud RE is estimated. In total, 283 500 radiative transfer simulations have been performed, spanning the typical parameter ranges associated with cirrus and contrails. Specific cases are selected and discussed. The data set is publicly available.
Kristian Strommen, Tim Woollings, Paolo Davini, Paolo Ruggieri, and Isla R. Simpson
Weather Clim. Dynam., 4, 853–874, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-853-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-853-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present evidence which strongly suggests that decadal variations in the intensity of the North Atlantic winter jet stream can be predicted by current forecast models but that decadal variations in its position appear to be unpredictable. It is argued that this skill at predicting jet intensity originates from the slow, predictable variability in sea surface temperatures in the sub-polar North Atlantic.
Jonathan D. Sharp, Andrea J. Fassbender, Brendan R. Carter, Gregory C. Johnson, Cristina Schultz, and John P. Dunne
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 4481–4518, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4481-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4481-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Dissolved oxygen content is a critical metric of ocean health. Recently, expanding fleets of autonomous platforms that measure oxygen in the ocean have produced a wealth of new data. We leverage machine learning to take advantage of this growing global dataset, producing a gridded data product of ocean interior dissolved oxygen at monthly resolution over nearly 2 decades. This work provides novel information for investigations of spatial, seasonal, and interannual variability in ocean oxygen.
Yiqi Zheng, Larry W. Horowitz, Raymond Menzel, David J. Paynter, Vaishali Naik, Jingyi Li, and Jingqiu Mao
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8993–9007, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8993-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8993-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Biogenic secondary organic aerosols (SOAs) account for a large fraction of fine aerosol at the global scale. Using long-term measurements and a climate model, we investigate anthropogenic impacts on biogenic SOA at both decadal and centennial timescales. Results show that despite reductions in biogenic precursor emissions, SOA has been strongly amplified by anthropogenic emissions since the preindustrial era and exerts a cooling radiative forcing.
Mark D. Zelinka, Christopher J. Smith, Yi Qin, and Karl E. Taylor
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8879–8898, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The primary uncertainty in how strongly Earth's climate has been perturbed by human activities comes from the unknown radiative impact of aerosol changes. Accurately quantifying these forcings – and their sub-components – in climate models is crucial for understanding the past and future simulated climate. In this study we describe biases in previously published estimates of aerosol radiative forcing in climate models and provide corrected estimates along with code for users to compute them.
Piers M. Forster, Christopher J. Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Mathias Hauser, Aurélien Ribes, Debbie Rosen, Nathan Gillett, Matthew D. Palmer, Joeri Rogelj, Karina von Schuckmann, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Blair Trewin, Xuebin Zhang, Myles Allen, Robbie Andrew, Arlene Birt, Alex Borger, Tim Boyer, Jiddu A. Broersma, Lijing Cheng, Frank Dentener, Pierre Friedlingstein, José M. Gutiérrez, Johannes Gütschow, Bradley Hall, Masayoshi Ishii, Stuart Jenkins, Xin Lan, June-Yi Lee, Colin Morice, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel Killick, Jan C. Minx, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Sophie Szopa, Peter Thorne, Robert Rohde, Maisa Rojas Corradi, Dominik Schumacher, Russell Vose, Kirsten Zickfeld, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 2295–2327, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2295-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2295-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This is a critical decade for climate action, but there is no annual tracking of the level of human-induced warming. We build on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment reports that are authoritative but published infrequently to create a set of key global climate indicators that can be tracked through time. Our hope is that this becomes an important annual publication that policymakers, media, scientists and the public can refer to.
Jan Polcher, Anthony Schrapffer, Eliott Dupont, Lucia Rinchiuso, Xudong Zhou, Olivier Boucher, Emmanuel Mouche, Catherine Ottlé, and Jérôme Servonnat
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2583–2606, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2583-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2583-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The proposed graphs of hydrological sub-grid elements for atmospheric models allow us to integrate the topographical elements needed in land surface models for a realistic representation of horizontal water and energy transport. The study demonstrates the numerical properties of the automatically built graphs and the simulated water flows.
Daniele Visioni, Ben Kravitz, Alan Robock, Simone Tilmes, Jim Haywood, Olivier Boucher, Mark Lawrence, Peter Irvine, Ulrike Niemeier, Lili Xia, Gabriel Chiodo, Chris Lennard, Shingo Watanabe, John C. Moore, and Helene Muri
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 5149–5176, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-5149-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Geoengineering indicates methods aiming to reduce the temperature of the planet by means of reflecting back a part of the incoming radiation before it reaches the surface or allowing more of the planetary radiation to escape into space. It aims to produce modelling experiments that are easy to reproduce and compare with different climate models, in order to understand the potential impacts of these techniques. Here we assess its past successes and failures and talk about its future.
Glen Chua, Vaishali Naik, and Larry Wayne Horowitz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 4955–4975, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4955-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4955-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The hydroxyl radical (OH) is an atmospheric
detergent, removing air pollutants and greenhouse gases like methane from the atmosphere. Thus, understanding how it is changing and responding to its various drivers is important for air quality and climate. We found that OH has increased by about 5 % globally from 1980 to 2014 in our model, mostly driven by increasing nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions. This suggests potential climate tradeoffs from air quality policies solely targeting NOx emissions.
Alban Planchat, Lester Kwiatkowski, Laurent Bopp, Olivier Torres, James R. Christian, Momme Butenschön, Tomas Lovato, Roland Séférian, Matthew A. Chamberlain, Olivier Aumont, Michio Watanabe, Akitomo Yamamoto, Andrew Yool, Tatiana Ilyina, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Kristen M. Krumhardt, Jörg Schwinger, Jerry Tjiputra, John P. Dunne, and Charles Stock
Biogeosciences, 20, 1195–1257, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1195-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1195-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Ocean alkalinity is critical to the uptake of atmospheric carbon and acidification in surface waters. We review the representation of alkalinity and the associated calcium carbonate cycle in Earth system models. While many parameterizations remain present in the latest generation of models, there is a general improvement in the simulated alkalinity distribution. This improvement is related to an increase in the export of biotic calcium carbonate, which closer resembles observations.
Susanne Baur, Alexander Nauels, Zebedee Nicholls, Benjamin M. Sanderson, and Carl-Friedrich Schleussner
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 367–381, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-367-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-367-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Solar radiation modification (SRM) artificially cools global temperature without acting on the cause of climate change. This study looks at how long SRM would have to be deployed to limit warming to 1.5 °C and how this timeframe is affected by different levels of mitigation, negative emissions and climate uncertainty. None of the three factors alone can guarantee short SRM deployment. Due to their uncertainty at the time of SRM initialization, any deployment risks may be several centuries long.
Bryan J. Johnson, Patrick Cullis, John Booth, Irina Petropavlovskikh, Glen McConville, Birgit Hassler, Gary A. Morris, Chance Sterling, and Samuel Oltmans
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 3133–3146, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3133-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3133-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In 1986, soon after the discovery of the Antarctic ozone hole, NOAA began year-round ozonesonde observations at South Pole Station to measure vertical profiles of ozone and temperature from the surface to 35 km. Balloon-borne ozonesondes launched at this unique site allow for tracking all phases of the yearly springtime ozone hole beginning in late winter and after sunrise, when rapid ozone depletion begins over the South Pole throughout the month of September.
Yann Quilcaille, Thomas Gasser, Philippe Ciais, and Olivier Boucher
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1129–1161, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1129-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1129-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The model OSCAR is a simple climate model, meaning its representation of the Earth system is simplified but calibrated on models of higher complexity. Here, we diagnose its latest version using a total of 99 experiments in a probabilistic framework and under observational constraints. OSCAR v3.1 shows good agreement with observations, complex Earth system models and emerging properties. Some points for improvements are identified, such as the ocean carbon cycle.
Yangxin Chen, Duoying Ji, Qian Zhang, John C. Moore, Olivier Boucher, Andy Jones, Thibaut Lurton, Michael J. Mills, Ulrike Niemeier, Roland Séférian, and Simone Tilmes
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 55–79, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-55-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-55-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Solar geoengineering has been proposed as a way of counteracting the warming effects of increasing greenhouse gases by reflecting solar radiation. This work shows that solar geoengineering can slow down the northern-high-latitude permafrost degradation but cannot preserve the permafrost ecosystem as that under a climate of the same warming level without solar geoengineering.
Manuel Schlund, Birgit Hassler, Axel Lauer, Bouwe Andela, Patrick Jöckel, Rémi Kazeroni, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, Brian Medeiros, Valeriu Predoi, Stéphane Sénési, Jérôme Servonnat, Tobias Stacke, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Klaus Zimmermann, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 315–333, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-315-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-315-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) is a community diagnostics and performance metrics tool for routine evaluation of Earth system models. Originally, ESMValTool was designed to process reformatted output provided by large model intercomparison projects like the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). Here, we describe a new extension of ESMValTool that allows for reading and processing native climate model output, i.e., data that have not been reformatted before.
Kevin Wolf, Nicolas Bellouin, and Olivier Boucher
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 287–309, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-287-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-287-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Recent studies estimate the radiative impact of contrails to be similar to or larger than that of emitted CO2; thus, contrail mitigation might be an opportunity to reduce the climate effects of aviation. A radiosonde data set is analyzed in terms of the vertical distribution of potential contrails, contrail mitigation by flight altitude changes, and linkages with the tropopause and jet stream. The effect of prospective jet engine developments and alternative fuels are estimated.
Jarmo S. Kikstra, Zebedee R. J. Nicholls, Christopher J. Smith, Jared Lewis, Robin D. Lamboll, Edward Byers, Marit Sandstad, Malte Meinshausen, Matthew J. Gidden, Joeri Rogelj, Elmar Kriegler, Glen P. Peters, Jan S. Fuglestvedt, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Bjørn H. Samset, Laura Wienpahl, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Kaj-Ivar van der Wijst, Alaa Al Khourdajie, Piers M. Forster, Andy Reisinger, Roberto Schaeffer, and Keywan Riahi
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 9075–9109, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9075-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-9075-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing hundreds or thousands of emission scenarios in terms of their global mean temperature implications requires standardised procedures of infilling, harmonisation, and probabilistic temperature assessments. We here present the open-source
climate-assessmentworkflow that was used in the IPCC AR6 Working Group III report. The paper provides key insight for anyone wishing to understand the assessment of climate outcomes of mitigation pathways in the context of the Paris Agreement.
Benjamin M. Sanderson and Maria Rugenstein
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1715–1736, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1715-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1715-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) is a measure of how much long-term warming should be expected in response to a change in greenhouse gas concentrations. It is generally calculated in climate models by extrapolating global average temperatures to a point of where the planet is no longer a net absorber of energy. Here we show that some climate models experience energy leaks which change as the planet warms, undermining the standard approach and biasing some existing model estimates of ECS.
Diego Bruciaferri, Marina Tonani, Isabella Ascione, Fahad Al Senafi, Enda O'Dea, Helene T. Hewitt, and Andrew Saulter
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 8705–8730, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8705-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8705-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
More accurate predictions of the Gulf's ocean dynamics are needed. We investigate the impact on the predictive skills of a numerical shelf sea model of the Gulf after changing a few key aspects. Increasing the lateral and vertical resolution and optimising the vertical coordinate system to best represent the leading physical processes at stake significantly improve the accuracy of the simulated dynamics. Additional work may be needed to get real benefit from using a more realistic bathymetry.
Johannes Quaas, Hailing Jia, Chris Smith, Anna Lea Albright, Wenche Aas, Nicolas Bellouin, Olivier Boucher, Marie Doutriaux-Boucher, Piers M. Forster, Daniel Grosvenor, Stuart Jenkins, Zbigniew Klimont, Norman G. Loeb, Xiaoyan Ma, Vaishali Naik, Fabien Paulot, Philip Stier, Martin Wild, Gunnar Myhre, and Michael Schulz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 12221–12239, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12221-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-12221-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Pollution particles cool climate and offset part of the global warming. However, they are washed out by rain and thus their effect responds quickly to changes in emissions. We show multiple datasets to demonstrate that aerosol emissions and their concentrations declined in many regions influenced by human emissions, as did the effects on clouds. Consequently, the cooling impact on the Earth energy budget became smaller. This change in trend implies a relative warming.
Sébastien Gardoll and Olivier Boucher
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 7051–7073, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7051-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7051-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Tropical cyclones (TCs) are one of the most devastating natural disasters, which justifies monitoring and prediction in the context of a changing climate. In this study, we have adapted and tested a convolutional neural network (CNN) for the classification of reanalysis outputs (ERA5 and MERRA-2 labeled by HURDAT2) according to the presence or absence of TCs. We tested the impact of interpolation and of "mixing and matching" the training and test sets on the performance of the CNN.
Marco A. Giorgetta, William Sawyer, Xavier Lapillonne, Panagiotis Adamidis, Dmitry Alexeev, Valentin Clément, Remo Dietlicher, Jan Frederik Engels, Monika Esch, Henning Franke, Claudia Frauen, Walter M. Hannah, Benjamin R. Hillman, Luis Kornblueh, Philippe Marti, Matthew R. Norman, Robert Pincus, Sebastian Rast, Daniel Reinert, Reiner Schnur, Uwe Schulzweida, and Bjorn Stevens
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6985–7016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6985-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6985-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This work presents a first version of the ICON atmosphere model that works not only on CPUs, but also on GPUs. This GPU-enabled ICON version is benchmarked on two GPU machines and a CPU machine. While the weak scaling is very good on CPUs and GPUs, the strong scaling is poor on GPUs. But the high performance of GPU machines allowed for first simulations of a short period of the quasi-biennial oscillation at very high resolution with explicit convection and gravity wave forcing.
Stephen G. Yeager, Nan Rosenbloom, Anne A. Glanville, Xian Wu, Isla Simpson, Hui Li, Maria J. Molina, Kristen Krumhardt, Samuel Mogen, Keith Lindsay, Danica Lombardozzi, Will Wieder, Who M. Kim, Jadwiga H. Richter, Matthew Long, Gokhan Danabasoglu, David Bailey, Marika Holland, Nicole Lovenduski, Warren G. Strand, and Teagan King
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6451–6493, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6451-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6451-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth system changes over a range of time and space scales, and some of these changes are predictable in advance. Short-term weather forecasts are most familiar, but recent work has shown that it is possible to generate useful predictions several seasons or even a decade in advance. This study focuses on predictions over intermediate timescales (up to 24 months in advance) and shows that there is promising potential to forecast a variety of changes in the natural environment.
Peter Hitchcock, Amy Butler, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Chaim I. Garfinkel, Tim Stockdale, James Anstey, Dann Mitchell, Daniela I. V. Domeisen, Tongwen Wu, Yixiong Lu, Daniele Mastrangelo, Piero Malguzzi, Hai Lin, Ryan Muncaster, Bill Merryfield, Michael Sigmond, Baoqiang Xiang, Liwei Jia, Yu-Kyung Hyun, Jiyoung Oh, Damien Specq, Isla R. Simpson, Jadwiga H. Richter, Cory Barton, Jeff Knight, Eun-Pa Lim, and Harry Hendon
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5073–5092, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5073-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5073-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes an experimental protocol focused on sudden stratospheric warmings to be carried out by subseasonal forecast modeling centers. These will allow for inter-model comparisons of these major disruptions to the stratospheric polar vortex and their impacts on the near-surface flow. The protocol will lead to new insights into the contribution of the stratosphere to subseasonal forecast skill and new approaches to the dynamical attribution of extreme events.
Charles D. Koven, Vivek K. Arora, Patricia Cadule, Rosie A. Fisher, Chris D. Jones, David M. Lawrence, Jared Lewis, Keith Lindsay, Sabine Mathesius, Malte Meinshausen, Michael Mills, Zebedee Nicholls, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Neil C. Swart, William R. Wieder, and Kirsten Zickfeld
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 885–909, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-885-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-885-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We explore the long-term dynamics of Earth's climate and carbon cycles under a pair of contrasting scenarios to the year 2300 using six models that include both climate and carbon cycle dynamics. One scenario assumes very high emissions, while the second assumes a peak in emissions, followed by rapid declines to net negative emissions. We show that the models generally agree that warming is roughly proportional to carbon emissions but that many other aspects of the model projections differ.
Irina Melnikova, Olivier Boucher, Patricia Cadule, Katsumasa Tanaka, Thomas Gasser, Tomohiro Hajima, Yann Quilcaille, Hideo Shiogama, Roland Séférian, Kaoru Tachiiri, Nicolas Vuichard, Tokuta Yokohata, and Philippe Ciais
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 779–794, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-779-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-779-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The deployment of bioenergy crops for capturing carbon from the atmosphere facilitates global warming mitigation via generating negative CO2 emissions. Here, we explored the consequences of large-scale energy crops deployment on the land carbon cycle. The land-use change for energy crops leads to carbon emissions and loss of future potential increase in carbon uptake by natural ecosystems. This impact should be taken into account by the modeling teams and accounted for in mitigation policies.
Simone Tilmes, Daniele Visioni, Andy Jones, James Haywood, Roland Séférian, Pierre Nabat, Olivier Boucher, Ewa Monica Bednarz, and Ulrike Niemeier
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 4557–4579, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-4557-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-4557-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This study assesses the impacts of climate interventions, using stratospheric sulfate aerosol and solar dimming on stratospheric ozone, based on three Earth system models with interactive stratospheric chemistry. The climate interventions have been applied to a high emission (baseline) scenario in order to reach global surface temperatures of a medium emission scenario. We find significant increases and decreases in total column ozone, depending on regions and seasons.
Roseanna C. McKay, Julie M. Arblaster, and Pandora Hope
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 413–428, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-413-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-413-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding what makes it hot in Australia in spring helps us better prepare for harmful impacts. We look at how the higher latitudes and tropics change the atmospheric circulation from early to late spring and how that changes maximum temperatures in Australia. We find that the relationship between maximum temperatures and the tropics is stronger in late spring than early spring. These findings could help improve forecasts of hot months in Australia in spring.
Lea Beusch, Zebedee Nicholls, Lukas Gudmundsson, Mathias Hauser, Malte Meinshausen, and Sonia I. Seneviratne
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2085–2103, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2085-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2085-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce the first chain of computationally efficient Earth system model (ESM) emulators to translate user-defined greenhouse gas emission pathways into regional temperature change time series accounting for all major sources of climate change projection uncertainty. By combining the global mean emulator MAGICC with the spatially resolved emulator MESMER, we can derive ESM-specific and constrained probabilistic emulations to rapidly provide targeted climate information at the local scale.
Andy Jones, Jim M. Haywood, Adam A. Scaife, Olivier Boucher, Matthew Henry, Ben Kravitz, Thibaut Lurton, Pierre Nabat, Ulrike Niemeier, Roland Séférian, Simone Tilmes, and Daniele Visioni
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2999–3016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2999-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2999-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Simulations by six Earth-system models of geoengineering by introducing sulfuric acid aerosols into the tropical stratosphere are compared. A robust impact on the northern wintertime North Atlantic Oscillation is found, exacerbating precipitation reduction over parts of southern Europe. In contrast, the models show no consistency with regard to impacts on the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation, although results do indicate a risk that the oscillation could become locked into a permanent westerly phase.
Nicholas A. Davis, Patrick Callaghan, Isla R. Simpson, and Simone Tilmes
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 197–214, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-197-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-197-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Specified dynamics schemes attempt to constrain the atmospheric circulation in a climate model to isolate the role of transport in chemical variability, evaluate model physics, and interpret field campaign observations. We show that the specified dynamics scheme in CESM2 erroneously suppresses convection and induces circulation errors that project onto errors in tracers, even using the most optimal settings. Development of a more sophisticated scheme is necessary for future progress.
Keith B. Rodgers, Sun-Seon Lee, Nan Rosenbloom, Axel Timmermann, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Clara Deser, Jim Edwards, Ji-Eun Kim, Isla R. Simpson, Karl Stein, Malte F. Stuecker, Ryohei Yamaguchi, Tamás Bódai, Eui-Seok Chung, Lei Huang, Who M. Kim, Jean-François Lamarque, Danica L. Lombardozzi, William R. Wieder, and Stephen G. Yeager
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 1393–1411, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1393-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1393-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A large ensemble of simulations with 100 members has been conducted with the state-of-the-art CESM2 Earth system model, using historical and SSP3-7.0 forcing. Our main finding is that there are significant changes in the variance of the Earth system in response to anthropogenic forcing, with these changes spanning a broad range of variables important to impacts for human populations and ecosystems.
Trevor J. McDougall, Paul M. Barker, Ryan M. Holmes, Rich Pawlowicz, Stephen M. Griffies, and Paul J. Durack
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6445–6466, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6445-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6445-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We show that the way that the air–sea heat flux is treated in ocean models means that the model's temperature variable should be interpreted as being Conservative Temperature, irrespective of whether the equation of state used in an ocean model is EOS-80 or TEOS-10.
Benjamin M. Sanderson, Angeline G. Pendergrass, Charles D. Koven, Florent Brient, Ben B. B. Booth, Rosie A. Fisher, and Reto Knutti
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 899–918, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-899-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-899-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Emergent constraints promise a pathway to the reduction in climate projection uncertainties by exploiting ensemble relationships between observable quantities and unknown climate response parameters. This study considers the robustness of these relationships in light of biases and common simplifications that may be present in the original ensemble of climate simulations. We propose a classification scheme for constraints and a number of practical case studies.
Yves Balkanski, Rémy Bonnet, Olivier Boucher, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, and Jérôme Servonnat
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 11423–11435, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-11423-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-11423-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models have persistent biases that impinge on our ability to make robust future regional predictions of precipitation. For the last 15 years, there has been little improvement in these biases. This work presents an accurate representation of dust absorption based upon observed dust mineralogical composition and size distribution. The striking result is that this more accurate representation improves tropical precipitations for climate models with too weak an African monsoon.
Camille Besombes, Olivier Pannekoucke, Corentin Lapeyre, Benjamin Sanderson, and Olivier Thual
Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 28, 347–370, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-28-347-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-28-347-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper investigates the potential of a type of deep generative neural network to produce realistic weather situations when trained from the climate of a general circulation model. The generator represents the climate in a compact latent space. It is able to reproduce many aspects of the targeted multivariate distribution. Some properties of our method open new perspectives such as the exploration of the extremes close to a given state or how to connect two realistic weather states.
Daniele Visioni, Douglas G. MacMartin, Ben Kravitz, Olivier Boucher, Andy Jones, Thibaut Lurton, Michou Martine, Michael J. Mills, Pierre Nabat, Ulrike Niemeier, Roland Séférian, and Simone Tilmes
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10039–10063, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10039-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10039-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A new set of simulations is used to investigate commonalities, differences and sources of uncertainty when simulating the injection of SO2 in the stratosphere in order to mitigate the effects of climate change (solar geoengineering). The models differ in how they simulate the aerosols and how they spread around the stratosphere, resulting in differences in projected regional impacts. Overall, however, the models agree that aerosols have the potential to mitigate the warming produced by GHGs.
Nicholas J. Leach, Stuart Jenkins, Zebedee Nicholls, Christopher J. Smith, John Lynch, Michelle Cain, Tristram Walsh, Bill Wu, Junichi Tsutsui, and Myles R. Allen
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3007–3036, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3007-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3007-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents an update of the FaIR simple climate model, which can estimate the impact of anthropogenic greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions on the global climate. This update aims to significantly increase the structural simplicity of the model, making it more understandable and transparent. This simplicity allows it to be implemented in a wide range of environments, including Excel. We suggest that it could be used widely in academia, corporate research, and education.
Antara Banerjee, Amy H. Butler, Lorenzo M. Polvani, Alan Robock, Isla R. Simpson, and Lantao Sun
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6985–6997, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6985-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6985-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We find that simulated stratospheric sulfate geoengineering could lead to warmer Eurasian winters alongside a drier Mediterranean and wetting to the north. These effects occur due to the strengthening of the Northern Hemisphere stratospheric polar vortex, which shifts the North Atlantic Oscillation to a more positive phase. We find the effects in our simulations to be much more significant than the wintertime effects of large tropical volcanic eruptions which inject much less sulfate aerosol.
Yuan Zhang, Olivier Boucher, Philippe Ciais, Laurent Li, and Nicolas Bellouin
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2029–2039, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2029-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2029-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We investigated different methods to reconstruct spatiotemporal distribution of the fraction of diffuse radiation (Fdf) to qualify the aerosol impacts on GPP using the ORCHIDEE_DF land surface model. We find that climatological-averaging methods which dampen the variability of Fdf can cause significant bias in the modeled diffuse radiation impacts on GPP. Better methods to reconstruct Fdf are recommended.
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.
Ben Kravitz, Douglas G. MacMartin, Daniele Visioni, Olivier Boucher, Jason N. S. Cole, Jim Haywood, Andy Jones, Thibaut Lurton, Pierre Nabat, Ulrike Niemeier, Alan Robock, Roland Séférian, and Simone Tilmes
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4231–4247, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4231-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4231-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates multi-model response to idealized geoengineering (high CO2 with solar reduction) across two different generations of climate models. We find that, with the exception of a few cases, the results are unchanged between the different generations. This gives us confidence that broad conclusions about the response to idealized geoengineering are robust.
Paul T. Griffiths, Lee T. Murray, Guang Zeng, Youngsub Matthew Shin, N. Luke Abraham, Alexander T. Archibald, Makoto Deushi, Louisa K. Emmons, Ian E. Galbally, Birgit Hassler, Larry W. Horowitz, James Keeble, Jane Liu, Omid Moeini, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Naga Oshima, David Tarasick, Simone Tilmes, Steven T. Turnock, Oliver Wild, Paul J. Young, and Prodromos Zanis
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 4187–4218, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4187-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-4187-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We analyse the CMIP6 Historical and future simulations for tropospheric ozone, a species which is important for many aspects of atmospheric chemistry. We show that the current generation of models agrees well with observations, being particularly successful in capturing trends in surface ozone and its vertical distribution in the troposphere. We analyse the factors that control ozone and show that they evolve over the period of the CMIP6 experiments.
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.
Chihiro Kodama, Tomoki Ohno, Tatsuya Seiki, Hisashi Yashiro, Akira T. Noda, Masuo Nakano, Yohei Yamada, Woosub Roh, Masaki Satoh, Tomoko Nitta, Daisuke Goto, Hiroaki Miura, Tomoe Nasuno, Tomoki Miyakawa, Ying-Wen Chen, and Masato Sugi
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 795–820, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-795-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-795-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the latest stable version of NICAM, a global atmospheric model, developed for high-resolution climate simulations toward the IPCC Assessment Report. Our model explicitly treats convection, clouds, and precipitation and could reduce the uncertainty of climate change projection. A series of test simulations demonstrated improvements (e.g., high cloud) and issues (e.g., low cloud, precipitation pattern), suggesting further necessity for model improvement and higher resolutions.
Ruth Petrie, Sébastien Denvil, Sasha Ames, Guillaume Levavasseur, Sandro Fiore, Chris Allen, Fabrizio Antonio, Katharina Berger, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Luca Cinquini, Eli Dart, Prashanth Dwarakanath, Kelsey Druken, Ben Evans, Laurent Franchistéguy, Sébastien Gardoll, Eric Gerbier, Mark Greenslade, David Hassell, Alan Iwi, Martin Juckes, Stephan Kindermann, Lukasz Lacinski, Maria Mirto, Atef Ben Nasser, Paola Nassisi, Eric Nienhouse, Sergey Nikonov, Alessandra Nuzzo, Clare Richards, Syazwan Ridzwan, Michel Rixen, Kim Serradell, Kate Snow, Ag Stephens, Martina Stockhause, Hans Vahlenkamp, and Rick Wagner
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 629–644, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-629-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-629-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the infrastructure that is used to distribute Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) data around the world for analysis by the climate research community. It is expected that there will be ~20 PB (petabytes) of data available for analysis. The operations team performed a series of preparation "data challenges" to ensure all components of the infrastructure were operational for when the data became available for timely data distribution and subsequent analysis.
Gillian Thornhill, William Collins, Dirk Olivié, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Alex Archibald, Susanne Bauer, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Stephanie Fiedler, Gerd Folberth, Ada Gjermundsen, Larry Horowitz, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Martine Michou, Jane Mulcahy, Pierre Nabat, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Fabien Paulot, Michael Schulz, Catherine E. Scott, Roland Séférian, Chris Smith, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilmes, Kostas Tsigaridis, and James Weber
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1105–1126, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1105-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1105-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We find that increased temperatures affect aerosols and reactive gases by changing natural emissions and their rates of removal from the atmosphere. Changing the composition of these species in the atmosphere affects the radiative budget of the climate system and therefore amplifies or dampens the climate response of climate models of the Earth system. This study found that the largest effect is a dampening of climate change as warmer temperatures increase the emissions of cooling aerosols.
Gillian D. Thornhill, William J. Collins, Ryan J. Kramer, Dirk Olivié, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Fiona M. O'Connor, Nathan Luke Abraham, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Susanne E. Bauer, Makoto Deushi, Louisa K. Emmons, Piers M. Forster, Larry W. Horowitz, Ben Johnson, James Keeble, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Martine Michou, Michael J. Mills, Jane P. Mulcahy, Gunnar Myhre, Pierre Nabat, Vaishali Naik, Naga Oshima, Michael Schulz, Christopher J. Smith, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilmes, Tongwen Wu, Guang Zeng, and Jie Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 853–874, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-853-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-853-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper is a study of how different constituents in the atmosphere, such as aerosols and gases like methane and ozone, affect the energy balance in the atmosphere. Different climate models were run using the same inputs to allow an easy comparison of the results and to understand where the models differ. We found the effect of aerosols is to reduce warming in the atmosphere, but this effect varies between models. Reactions between gases are also important in affecting climate.
Katherine Dagon, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Rosie A. Fisher, and David M. Lawrence
Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 6, 223–244, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-6-223-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-6-223-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Uncertainties in land model projections are important to understand in order to build confidence in Earth system modeling. In this paper, we introduce a framework for estimating uncertain land model parameters with machine learning. This method increases the computational efficiency of this process relative to traditional hand tuning approaches and provides objective methods to assess the results. We further identify key processes and parameters that are important for accurate land modeling.
Steven T. Turnock, Robert J. Allen, Martin Andrews, Susanne E. Bauer, Makoto Deushi, Louisa Emmons, Peter Good, Larry Horowitz, Jasmin G. John, Martine Michou, Pierre Nabat, Vaishali Naik, David Neubauer, Fiona M. O'Connor, Dirk Olivié, Naga Oshima, Michael Schulz, Alistair Sellar, Sungbo Shim, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilmes, Kostas Tsigaridis, Tongwen Wu, and Jie Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 14547–14579, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14547-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14547-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
A first assessment is made of the historical and future changes in air pollutants from models participating in the 6th Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). Substantial benefits to future air quality can be achieved in future scenarios that implement measures to mitigate climate and involve reductions in air pollutant emissions, particularly methane. However, important differences are shown between models in the future regional projection of air pollutants under the same scenario.
Maialen Iturbide, José M. Gutiérrez, Lincoln M. Alves, Joaquín Bedia, Ruth Cerezo-Mota, Ezequiel Cimadevilla, Antonio S. Cofiño, Alejandro Di Luca, Sergio Henrique Faria, Irina V. Gorodetskaya, Mathias Hauser, Sixto Herrera, Kevin Hennessy, Helene T. Hewitt, Richard G. Jones, Svitlana Krakovska, Rodrigo Manzanas, Daniel Martínez-Castro, Gemma T. Narisma, Intan S. Nurhati, Izidine Pinto, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Bart van den Hurk, and Carolina S. Vera
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2959–2970, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2959-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2959-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We present an update of the IPCC WGI reference regions used in AR5 for the synthesis of climate change information. This revision was guided by the basic principles of climatic consistency and model representativeness (in particular for the new CMIP6 simulations). We also present a new dataset of monthly CMIP5 and CMIP6 spatially aggregated information using the new reference regions and describe a worked example of how to use this dataset to inform regional climate change studies.
Camilla W. Stjern, Bjørn H. Samset, Olivier Boucher, Trond Iversen, Jean-François Lamarque, Gunnar Myhre, Drew Shindell, and Toshihiko Takemura
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 13467–13480, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13467-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13467-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The span between the warmest and coldest temperatures over a day is a climate parameter that influences both agriculture and human health. Using data from 10 models, we show how individual climate drivers such as greenhouse gases and aerosols produce distinctly different responses in this parameter in high-emission regions. Given the high uncertainty in future aerosol emissions, this improved understanding of the temperature responses may ultimately help these regions prepare for future changes.
Yuan Zhang, Ana Bastos, Fabienne Maignan, Daniel Goll, Olivier Boucher, Laurent Li, Alessandro Cescatti, Nicolas Vuichard, Xiuzhi Chen, Christof Ammann, M. Altaf Arain, T. Andrew Black, Bogdan Chojnicki, Tomomichi Kato, Ivan Mammarella, Leonardo Montagnani, Olivier Roupsard, Maria J. Sanz, Lukas Siebicke, Marek Urbaniak, Francesco Primo Vaccari, Georg Wohlfahrt, Will Woodgate, and Philippe Ciais
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5401–5423, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5401-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5401-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We improved the ORCHIDEE LSM by distinguishing diffuse and direct light in canopy and evaluated the new model with observations from 159 sites. Compared with the old model, the new model has better sunny GPP and reproduced the diffuse light fertilization effect observed at flux sites. Our simulations also indicate different mechanisms causing the observed GPP enhancement under cloudy conditions at different times. The new model has the potential to study large-scale impacts of aerosol changes.
David S. Stevenson, Alcide Zhao, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Simone Tilmes, Guang Zeng, Lee T. Murray, William J. Collins, Paul T. Griffiths, Sungbo Shim, Larry W. Horowitz, Lori T. Sentman, and Louisa Emmons
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 12905–12920, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-12905-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-12905-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We present historical trends in atmospheric oxidizing capacity (OC) since 1850 from the latest generation of global climate models and compare these with estimates from measurements. OC controls levels of many key reactive gases, including methane (CH4). We find small model trends up to 1980, then increases of about 9 % up to 2014, disagreeing with (uncertain) measurement-based trends. Major drivers of OC trends are emissions of CH4, NOx, and CO; these will be important for future CH4 trends.
Robin D. Lamboll, Zebedee R. J. Nicholls, Jarmo S. Kikstra, Malte Meinshausen, and Joeri Rogelj
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5259–5275, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5259-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5259-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Many models project how human activity can lead to more or less climate change, but most of these models do not project all climate-relevant emissions, potentially biasing climate projections. This paper outlines a Python package called Silicone, which can add missing emissions in a flexible yet high-throughput manner. It does this
infillingbased on more complete literature projections. It facilitates a more complete understanding of the climate impact of alternative emission pathways.
Zebedee R. J. Nicholls, Malte Meinshausen, Jared Lewis, Robert Gieseke, Dietmar Dommenget, Kalyn Dorheim, Chen-Shuo Fan, Jan S. Fuglestvedt, Thomas Gasser, Ulrich Golüke, Philip Goodwin, Corinne Hartin, Austin P. Hope, Elmar Kriegler, Nicholas J. Leach, Davide Marchegiani, Laura A. McBride, Yann Quilcaille, Joeri Rogelj, Ross J. Salawitch, Bjørn H. Samset, Marit Sandstad, Alexey N. Shiklomanov, Ragnhild B. Skeie, Christopher J. Smith, Steve Smith, Katsumasa Tanaka, Junichi Tsutsui, and Zhiang Xie
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5175–5190, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5175-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5175-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Computational limits mean that we cannot run our most comprehensive climate models for all applications of interest. In such cases, reduced complexity models (RCMs) are used. Here, researchers working on 15 different models present the first systematic community effort to evaluate and compare RCMs: the Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project (RCMIP). Our research ensures that users of RCMs can more easily evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and limitations of their tools.
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.
Cited articles
Allen, B. J., Hill, D. J., Burke, A. M., Clark, M., Marchant, R., Stringer, L. C., Williams, D. R., and Lyon, C.: Projected future climatic forcing on the global distribution of vegetation types, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 379, https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0011, 2024.
Armour, K. C., Proistosescu, C., Dong, Y., Hahn, L. C., Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, E., Pauling, A. G., Wills, R. C. J., Andrews, T., Stuecker, M. F., Po-Chedley, S., Mitevski, I., Forster, P. M., and Gregory, J. M.: Sea-surface temperature pattern effects have slowed global warming and biased warming-based constraints on climate sensitivity, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 121, e2312093121, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2312093121, 2024.
Arneth, A., Denton, F., Agus, F., Elbehri, A., Erb, K., Osman Elasha, B., Rahimi, M., Rounsevell, M., Spence, A., and Valentini, R.: Framing and Context, in: Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems, edited by: Shukla, P. R., Skea, J., Calvo Buendia, E., Masson-Delmotte, V., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D. C., Zhai, P., Slade, R., Connors, S., van Diemen, R., Ferrat, M., Haughey, E., Luz, S., Neogi, S., Pathak, M., Petzold, J., Portugal Pereira, J., Vyas, P., Huntley, E., Kissick, K., Belkacemi, M., and Malley, J., Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157988.003, 2019.
Aubry, T. J., Toohey, M., Marshall, L., Schmidt, A., and Jellinek, A. M.: A new volcanic stratospheric sulfate Aerosol Forcing Emulator (EVA_H): comparison with interactive stratospheric aerosol models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2019JD031303, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019jd031303, 2019.
Aubry, T. J., Engwell, S., Bonadonna, C., Carazzo, G., Scollo, S., Van Eaton, A. R., Taylor, I. A., Jessop, D., Eychenne, J., Gouhier, M., Mastin, L. G., Wallace, K. L., Biass, S., Bursik, M., Grainger, R. G., Jellinek, A. M., and Schmidt, A.: The Independent Volcanic Eruption Source Parameter Archive (IVESPA, version 1.0): A new observational database to support explosive eruptive column model validation and development, J. Volcanol. Geoth. Res., 417, 107295, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2021.107295, 2021.
Balaji, V., Taylor, K. E., Juckes, M., Lawrence, B. N., Durack, P. J., Lautenschlager, M., Blanton, C., Cinquini, L., Denvil, S., Elkington, M., Guglielmo, F., Guilyardi, E., Hassell, D., Kharin, S., Kindermann, S., Nikonov, S., Radhakrishnan, A., Stockhause, M., Weigel, T., and Williams, D.: Requirements for a global data infrastructure in support of CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3659–3680, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3659-2018, 2018.
Bellenger, H., Guilyardi, E., Leloup, J., Lengaigne, M., and Vialard, J.: ENSO representation in climate models: from CMIP3 to CMIP5, Clim. Dynam., 42, 1999–2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1783-z, 2013.
Bellouin, N., Quaas, J., Gryspeerdt, E., Kinne, S., Stier, P., Watson-Parris, D., Boucher, O., Carslaw, K. S., Christensen, M., Daniau, A. L., and Dufresne, J. L.: Bounding global aerosol radiative forcing of climate change, Rev. Geophys., 58, e2019RG000660, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000660, 2020.
Beusch, L., Gudmundsson, L., and Seneviratne, S. I.: Crossbreeding CMIP6 Earth system models with an emulator for regionally optimized land temperature projections, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2019GL086812, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019gl086812, 2020.
Boer, G. J., Smith, D. M., Cassou, C., Doblas-Reyes, F., Danabasoglu, G., Kirtman, B., Kushnir, Y., Kimoto, M., Meehl, G. A., Msadek, R., Mueller, W. A., Taylor, K. E., Zwiers, F., Rixen, M., Ruprich-Robert, Y., and Eade, R.: The Decadal Climate Prediction Project (DCPP) contribution to CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3751–3777, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3751-2016, 2016.
Borodina, A., Fischer, E. M., and Knutti, R.: Models are likely to underestimate increase in heavy rainfall in the extratropical regions with high rainfall intensity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 7401–7409, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017gl074530, 2017.
Boulton, C. A., Lenton, T. M., and Boers, N.: Pronounced loss of Amazon rainforest resilience since the early 2000s, Nat. Clim. Change, 12, 271–278, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01287-8, 2022.
Brunner, L., Pendergrass, A. G., Lehner, F., Merrifield, A. L., Lorenz, R., and Knutti, R.: Reduced global warming from CMIP6 projections when weighting models by performance and independence, Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 995–1012, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-995-2020, 2020.
Buontempo, C., Burgess, S. N., Dee, D., Pinty, B., Thépaut, J.-N., Rixen, M., Almond, S., Armstrong, D., Brookshaw, A., Alos, A. L., Bell, B., Bergeron, C., Cagnazzo, C., Comyn-Platt, E., Damasio-Da-Costa, E., Guillory, A., Hersbach, H., Horányi, A., Nicolas, J., Obregon, A., Ramos, E. P., Raoult, B., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Suttie, M., Vamborg, F., Varndell, J., Vermoote, S., Yang, X., and De Marcilla, J. G.: The Copernicus Climate Change Service: Climate Science in Action, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 103, E2669–E2687, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-21-0315.1, 2022.
Chase, A. B., Weihe, C., and Martiny, J. B. H.: Adaptive differentiation and rapid evolution of a soil bacterium along a climate gradient, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 118, e2101254118, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2101254118, 2021.
Chemke, R. and Coumou, D.: Human influence on the recent weakening of storm tracks in boreal summer, Npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 7, 86, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-024-00640-2, 2024.
Chim, M. M., Aubry, T. J., Abraham, N. L., Marshall, L., Mulcahy, J., Walton, J., and Schmidt, A.: Climate projections very likely underestimate future volcanic forcing and its climatic effects, Geophys. Res. Lett., 50, e2023GL103743, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023gl103743, 2023.
Chim, M. M., Aubry, T. J., Smith, C., and Schmidt, A.: Neglecting future sporadic volcanic eruptions underestimates climate uncertainty, Communications Earth & Environment, 6, 236, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-025-02208-1, 2025.
Chini, L. P., Hurtt, G. C., Klein Goldewijk, K., Sitch, S., Rosan, T. M., Pongratz, J., Brasika, I. B. M., and Friedlingstein, P.: December. Global Land-Use Forcing Datasets for Carbon/Climate Models and Biodiversity Studies, in: AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, vol. 2023, San Francisco, CA 11–15 December 2023, GC11C-04, 2023.
Clarke, B., Barnes, C., Sparks, N., Toumi, R., Yang, W., Giguere, J., Woods Placky, B., Gilford, D., Pershing, A., Winkley, S., Vecchi, G. A., Arrighi, J., Roy, M., Poole-Selters, L., Van Sant, C., Grieco, M., Singh, R., Vahlberg, M., Kew, S., Pinto, I., Otto, F., Hess, V., Gorham, E., Rodgers, S., Philip, S., and Kimutai, J.: Climate change key driver of catastrophic impacts of Hurricane Helene that devastated both coastal and inland communities, Report of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change, Faculty of Natural Sciences, https://doi.org/10.25561/115024, 2024.
Coats, S. and Karnauskas, K. B.: Are simulated and observed twentieth century Tropical Pacific sea surface temperature trends significant relative to internal variability?, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 9928–9937, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017gl074622, 2017.
Collins, W. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Schulz, M., Boucher, O., Eyring, V., Hegglin, M. I., Maycock, A., Myhre, G., Prather, M., Shindell, D., and Smith, S. J.: AerChemMIP: quantifying the effects of chemistry and aerosols in CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 585–607, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017, 2017.
Cubasch, U., Meehl, G. A., Boer, G. J., Stouffer, R. J., Dix, M., Noda, A., Senior, C. A., Raper, S. U., and Yap, K. S.: Projections of future climate change, in: Climate Change 2001: The scientific basis. Contribution of WG1 to the Third As, sessment Report of the IPCC (TAR), Cambridge University Press, 525–582, https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/TAR-09.pdf (last access: 15 September 2025), 2001.
Dong, Y., Pauling, A. G., Sadal, S., and Armour, K. C.: Antarctic Ice-Sheet Meltwater Reduces Transient Warming and Climate Sensitivity Through the Sea Surface Temperature Pattern Effect, Geophys. Res. Lett., 49, e2022GL101249, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022gl101249, 2022.
Drijfhout, S., Bathiany, S., Beaulieu, C., Brovkin, V., Claussen, M., Huntingford, C., Scheffer, M., Sgubin, G., and Swingedouw, D.: Catalogue of abrupt shifts in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate models, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 112, 43, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1511451112, 2015.
Dunne, J., Hewitt, H., Tegtmeier, S., Senior, C., Ilyina, T., Fox-Kemper, B., and O'Rourke, E.: Climate Projections in Next Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, WMO Bulletin, 72, 7–13, 2023.
Dunne, J. P., Winton, M., Bacmeister, J., Danabasoglu, G., Gettelman, A., Golaz, J., Hannay, C., Schmidt, G. A., Krasting, J. P., Leung, L. R., Nazarenko, L., Sentman, L. T., Stouffer, R. J., and Wolfe, J. D.: Comparison of equilibrium climate sensitivity estimates from Slab Ocean, 150-Year, and longer simulations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL088852, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020gl088852, 2020.
Durack, P., Taylor, K., Eyring, V., Ames, S., Hoang, T., Nadeau, D., Doutriaux, C., Stockhause, M., and Gleckler, P.: Toward standardized data sets for climate model experimentation, Eos, 99, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018eo101751, 2018.
Durack, P. J., Taylor, K. E., Gleckler, P. J., Meehl, G. A., Lawrence, B. N., Covey, C., Stouffer, R. J., Levavasseur, G., Ben-Nasser, A., Denvil, S., Stockhause, M., Gregory, J. M., Juckes, M., Ames, S. K., Antonio, F., Bader, D. C., Dunne, J. P., Ellis, D., Eyring, V., Fiore, S. L., Joussaume, S., Kershaw, P., Lamarque, J.-F., Lautenschlager, M., Lee, J., Mauzey, C. F., Mizielinski, M., Nassisi, P., Nuzzo, A., O'Rourke, E., Painter, J., Potter, G. L., Rodriguez, S., and Williams, D. N.: The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP): Reviewing project history, evolution, infrastructure and implementation, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3729, 2025.
Erfani, E. and Burls, N. J.: The Strength of Low-Cloud Feedbacks and Tropical Climate: A CESM sensitivity study, J. Climate, 32, 2497–2516, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-18-0551.1, 2019.
Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF), https://esgf.github.io/, last access: 15 September 2025.
Espinosa, Z. I. and Zelinka, M. D.: The shortwave Cloud-SST feedback amplifies Multi-Decadal Pacific Sea surface temperature trends: Implications for observed cooling, Geophys. Res. Lett., 51, e2024GL111039, https://doi.org/10.1029/2024gl111039, 2024.
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016.
Eyring, V., Gillett, N. P., Achuta Rao, K. M., Barimalala, R., Barreiro Parrillo, M., Bellouin, N., Cassou, C., Durack, P. J., Kosaka, Y., McGregor, S., Min, S., Morgenstern, O., and Sun, Y.: Human Influence on the Climate System, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 423–552, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.005, 2021.
Fang, S., Sigl, M., Toohey, M., Jungclaus, J., Zanchettin, D., and Timmreck, C.: The role of small to moderate volcanic eruptions in the early 19th century climate, Geophys. Res. Lett., 50, e2023GL105307, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023gl105307, 2023.
Fox-Kemper, B., Hewitt, H. T., Xiao, C., Aðalgeirsdóttir, G., Drijfhout, S. S., Edwards, T. L., Golledge, N. R., Hemer, M., Kopp, R. E., Krinner, G., Mix, A., Notz, D., Nowicki, S., Nurhati, I. S., Ruiz, L., Sallée, J.-B., Slangen, A. B. A., and Yu, Y.: Ocean, Cryosphere and Sea Level Change, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1211–1362, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.011, 2021.
Funke, B., Dudok de Wit, T., Ermolli, I., Haberreiter, M., Kinnison, D., Marsh, D., Nesse, H., Seppälä, A., Sinnhuber, M., and Usoskin, I.: Towards the definition of a solar forcing dataset for CMIP7, Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1217–1227, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1217-2024, 2024.
Fyfe, J. C., Kharin, V. V., Santer, B. D., Cole, J. N. S., and Gillett, N. P.: Significant impact of forcing uncertainty in a large ensemble of climate model simulations, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 118, e2016549118, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2016549118, 2021.
García-Franco, J. L., Gómez-Ramos, O., and Domínguez, C.: Hurricane Otis: the costliest and strongest hurricane at landfall on record in Mexico, Weather, 79, 182–184, https://doi.org/10.1002/wea.4555, 2024.
Gier, B. K., Buchwitz, M., Reuter, M., Cox, P. M., Friedlingstein, P., and Eyring, V.: Spatially resolved evaluation of Earth system models with satellite column-averaged CO2, Biogeosciences, 17, 6115–6144, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020, 2020.
Gillett, N. P., Simpson, I. R., Hegerl, G., Knutti, R., Mitchell, D., Ribes, A., Shiogama, H., Stone, D., Tebaldi, C., Wolski, P., Zhang, W., and Arora, V. K.: The Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project (DAMIP v2.0) contribution to CMIP7, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4086, 2025.
Giorgi, F. and Gutowski, W. J.: Regional Dynamical Downscaling and the CORDEX initiative, Annu. Rev. Env. Resour., 40, 467–490, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-102014-021217, 2015.
Gregory, J. M., Bi, D., Collier, M. A., Dix, Hirst, A. C., Hu, A., Huber, M., Knutti, R., Marsland, S. J., Meinshausen, M., Rashid, H. A., Rotstayn, L. D., Schurer, A., and Church, J. A.: Climate models without preindustrial volcanic forcing underestimate historical ocean thermal expansion, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 1600–1604, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50339, 2013.
Grose, M. R., Narsey, S., Trancoso, R., Mackallah, C., Delage, F., Dowdy, A., Di Virgilio, G., Watterson, I., Dobrohotoff, P., Rashid, H. A., Rauniyar, S., Henley, B., Thatcher, M., Syktus, J., Abramowitz, G., Evans, J. P., Su, C.-H., and Takbash, A.: A CMIP6-based multi-model downscaling ensemble to underpin climate change services in Australia, Climate Services, 30, 100368, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2023.100368, 2023.
Gutiérrez, J. M., Jones, R. G., Narisma, G. T., Alves, L. M., Amjad, M., Gorodetskaya, I. V., Grose, M., Klutse, N. A. B., Krakovska, S., Li, J., Martínez-Castro, D., Mearns, L. O., Mernild, S. H., Ngo-Duc, T., van den Hurk, B., and Yoon, J.-H.: Atlas, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Interactive Atlas, http://interactive-atlas.ipcc.ch/ (last access: 15 September 2025), 2021.
Gutowski Jr., W. J., Giorgi, F., Timbal, B., Frigon, A., Jacob, D., Kang, H.-S., Raghavan, K., Lee, B., Lennard, C., Nikulin, G., O'Rourke, E., Rixen, M., Solman, S., Stephenson, T., and Tangang, F.: WCRP COordinated Regional Downscaling EXperiment (CORDEX): a diagnostic MIP for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 4087–4095, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4087-2016, 2016.
Hajima, T., Kawamiya, M., Ito, A., Tachiiri, K., Jones, C. D., Arora, V., Brovkin, V., Séférian, R., Liddicoat, S., Friedlingstein, P., and Shevliakova, E.: Consistency of global carbon budget between concentration- and emission-driven historical experiments simulated by CMIP6 Earth system models and suggestions for improved simulation of CO2 concentration, Biogeosciences, 22, 1447–1473, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-1447-2025, 2025.
Hall, A., Cox, P., Huntingford, C., and Klein, S.: Progressing emergent constraints on future climate change, Nat. Clim. Change, 9, 269–278, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0436-6, 2019.
Hausfather, Z., Marvel, K., Schmidt, G. A., Nielsen-Gammon, J. W., and Zelinka, M.: Climate simulations: recognize the `hot model' problem, Nature, 605, 26–29, https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01192-2, 2022.
Hawkins, E. and Sutton, R.: The potential to narrow uncertainty in regional climate predictions, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 90, 1095–1108, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009bams2607.1, 2009.
Hewitt, C. D., Guglielmo, F., Joussaume, S., Bessembinder, J., Christel, I., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Djurdjevic, V., Garrett, N., Kjellström, E., Krzic, A., Costa, M. M., and St Clair, A. L.: Recommendations for future research priorities for climate modeling and climate services, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E578–E588, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-20-0103.1, 2020.
Hewitt, H., Flato, G., O’Rourke, E., Dunne, J. P., Adloff, F., Arblaster, J., Bonou, F., Boucher, O., Cavazos, T., Dingley, B., Durack, P. J., Fox-Kemper, B., Ilyina, T., Miyakawa, T., Mizielinski, M., Naik, V., Nicholls, Z., Pincus, R., Taylor, K. E., Tegtmeier, S., and Wedi, N.: Towards provision of regularly updated climate data from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, Plos Climate, PCLM-D-25-00302, in press, 2025.
Hoesly, R. M., Smith, S., Prime, N., Ahsan, H., and Suchyta, H.: A Global Anthropogenic Emissions Inventory of Reactive Gases and Aerosols (1750–2022): an Update to the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), in: AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, vol. 2023, San Francisco, CA, 11–15 December 2023, GC11C-05, 2023.
Holland, G. and Bruyère, C. L.: Recent intense hurricane response to global climate change, Clim. Dynam., 42, 617–627, 2014.
Holland, P. R., Bevan, S. L., and Luckman, A. J.: Strong ocean melting feedback during the recent retreat of Thwaites glacier, Geophysical Research Letters, 50, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023gl103088, 2023.
Holland, M. M., Hannay, C., Fasullo, J., Jahn, A., Kay, J. E., Mills, M., Simpson, I. R., Wieder, W., Lawrence, P., Kluzek, E., and Bailey, D.: New model ensemble reveals how forcing uncertainty and model structure alter climate simulated across CMIP generations of the Community Earth System Model, Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1585–1602, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1585-2024, 2024.
Hopcroft, P. O. and Valdes, P. J.: Paleoclimate-conditioning reveals a North Africa land–atmosphere tipping point, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 118, e2108783118, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2108783118, 2021.
Hourdin, F., Mauritsen, T., Gettelman, A., Golaz, J.-C., Balaji, V., Duan, Q., Folini, D., Ji, D., Klocke, D., Qian, Y., Rauser, F., Rio, C., Tomassini, L., Watanabe, M., and Williamson, D.: The Art and science of climate model tuning, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 589–602, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-15-00135.1, 2016.
IPCC: Annex VII: Glossary, edited by: Matthews, J. B. R., Möller, V., van Diemen, R., Fuglestvedt, J. S., Masson-Delmotte, V., Méndez, C., Semenov, S., and Reisinger, A., in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2215–2256, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.022, 2021.
Irving, D., Hobbs, W., Church, J., and Zika, J.: A mass and energy conservation analysis of drift in the CMIP6 ensemble, J. Climate, 34, 3157–3170, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-20-0281.1, 2021.
Ito, A., Hajima, T., Lawrence, D. M., Brovkin, V., Delire, C., Guenet, B., Jones, C. D., Malyshev, S., Materia, S., McDermid, S. P., and Peano, D.: Soil carbon sequestration simulated in CMIP6-LUMIP models: implications for climatic mitigation, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 124061, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abc912, 2020.
Jakob, C., Gettelman, A., and Pitman, A.: The need to operationalize climate modelling, Nat. Clim. Change, 13, 1158–1160, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01849-4, 2023.
Jones, C. D., Arora, V., Friedlingstein, P., Bopp, L., Brovkin, V., Dunne, J., Graven, H., Hoffman, F., Ilyina, T., John, J. G., Jung, M., Kawamiya, M., Koven, C., Pongratz, J., Raddatz, T., Randerson, J. T., and Zaehle, S.: C4MIP – The Coupled Climate–Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison Project: experimental protocol for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2853–2880, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2853-2016, 2016.
Juckes, M., Taylor, K. E., Antonio, F., Brayshaw, D., Buontempo, C., Cao, J., Durack, P. J., Kawamiya, M., Kim, H., Lovato, T., Mackallah, C., Mizielinski, M., Nuzzo, A., Stockhause, M., Visioni, D., Walton, J., Turner, B., O'Rourke, E., and Dingley, B.: Baseline Climate Variables for Earth System Modelling, Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2639–2663, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2639-2025, 2025.
Kang, S. M., Xie, S.-P., Shin, Y., Kim, H., Hwang, Y.-T., Stuecker, M. F., Xiang, B., and Hawcroft, M.: Walker circulation response to extratropical radiative forcing, Science Advances, 6, eabd3021, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd3021, 2020.
Kang, S. M., Yu, Y., Deser, C., Zhang, X., Kang, I.-S., Lee, S.-S., Rodgers, K. B., and Ceppi, P.: Global impacts of recent Southern Ocean cooling, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 120, e2300881120, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2300881120, 2023.
Kay, J. E., Deser, C., Phillips, A., Mai, A., Hannay, C., Strand, G., Arblaster, J. M., Bates, S. C., Danabasoglu, G., Edwards, J., Holland, M., Kushner, P., Lamarque, J.-F., Lawrence, D., Lindsay, K., Middleton, A., Munoz, E., Neale, R., Oleson, K., Polvani, L., and Vertenstein, M.: The Community Earth System Model (CESM) Large Ensemble Project: a community resource for studying climate change in the presence of internal climate variability, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 96, 1333–1349, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-13-00255.1, 2015.
Kim, H., Kang, S. M., Kay, J. E., and Xie, S.-P.: Subtropical clouds key to Southern Ocean teleconnections to the tropical Pacific, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 119, e2200514119, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2200514119, 2022.
Knutti, R., Masson, D., and Gettelman, A.: Climate model genealogy: Generation CMIP5 and how we got there, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 1194–1199, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50256, 2013.
Kopp, R. E., Garner, G. G., Hermans, T. H. J., Jha, S., Kumar, P., Slangen, A. B. A., Turilli, M., Edwards, T. L., Gregory, J. M., Koubbe, G., Levermann, A., Merzky, A., Nowicki, S., Palmer, M. D., and Smith, C.: The Framework for Assessing Changes To Sea-level (FACTS) v1.0-rc: A platform for characterizing parametric and structural uncertainty in future global, relative, and extreme sea-level change, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-14, 2023.
Kovilakam, M., Thomason, L. W., Ernest, N., Rieger, L., Bourassa, A., and Millán, L.: The Global Space-based Stratospheric Aerosol Climatology (version 2.0): 1979–2018, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2607–2634, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2607-2020, 2020.
Kuma, P., Bender, F. A.-M., and Jönsson, A. R.: Climate Model Code genealogy and its relation to climate feedbacks and sensitivity, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2022MS003588, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ms003588, 2023.
Lee, J. Y., Marotzke, J., Bala, G., Cao, L., Corti, S., Dunne, J. P., Engelbrecht, F., Fischer, E., Fyfe, J. C., Jones, C., and Maycock, A.: Future global climate: scenario-based projections and near-term information, in: Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, 553–672, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.006, 2021.
Lennon, J. T., Abramoff, R. Z., Allison, S. D., Burckhardt, R. M., DeAngelis, K. M., Dunne, J. P., Frey, S. D., Friedlingstein, P., Hawkes, C. V., Hungate, B. A., Khurana, S., Kivlin, S. N., Levine, N. M., Manzoni, S., Martiny, A. C., Martiny, J. B. H., Nguyen, N. K., Rawat, M., Talmy, D., Todd-Brown, K., Vogt, M., Wieder, W. R., and Zakem, E. J.: Priorities, opportunities, and challenges for integrating microorganisms into Earth system models for climate change prediction, mBio, 15, e00455-24, https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.00455-24, 2024.
Lenton, T. M., Held, H., Kriegler, E., Hall, J. W., Lucht, W., Rahmstorf, S., and Schellnhuber, H. J.: Tipping elements in the Earth's climate system, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 105, 1786–1793, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0705414105, 2008.
MacDougall, A. H., Frölicher, T. L., Jones, C. D., Rogelj, J., Matthews, H. D., Zickfeld, K., Arora, V. K., Barrett, N. J., Brovkin, V., Burger, F. A., Eby, M., Eliseev, A. V., Hajima, T., Holden, P. B., Jeltsch-Thömmes, A., Koven, C., Mengis, N., Menviel, L., Michou, M., Mokhov, I. I., Oka, A., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Shaffer, G., Sokolov, A., Tachiiri, K., Tjiputra, J., Wiltshire, A., and Ziehn, T.: Is there warming in the pipeline? A multi-model analysis of the Zero Emissions Commitment from CO2, Biogeosciences, 17, 2987–3016, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-2987-2020, 2020.
Massoud, E. C., Lee, H. K., Terando, A., and Wehner, M.: Bayesian weighting of climate models based on climate sensitivity, Communications Earth & Environment, 4, 365, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-01009-8, 2023.
Mathison, C. T., Burke, E., Kovacs, E., Munday, G., Huntingford, C., Jones, C., Smith, C., Steinert, N., Wiltshire, A., Gohar, L., and Varney, R.: A rapid application emissions-to-impacts tool for scenario assessment: Probabilistic Regional Impacts from Model patterns and Emissions (PRIME), EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2932, 2024.
Matthews, H. D., Gillett, N. P., Stott, P. A., and Zickfeld, K.: The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions, Nature, 459, 829–832, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08047, 2009.
Meehl, G. A., Boer, G. J., Covey, C., Latif, M., and Stouffer, R. J.: Intercomparison makes for a better climate model, Eos T. Am. Geophys. Un., 78, 445–451, https://doi.org/10.1029/97eo00276, 1997.
Meehl, G. A., Boer, G. J., Covey, C., Latif, M., and Stouffer, R. J.: The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 81, 313–318, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(2000)081, 2000.
Meehl, G. A., Covey, C., Delworth, T., Latif, M., McAvaney, B., Mitchell, J. F. B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: THE WCRP CMIP3 Multimodel Dataset: A new era in climate change research, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 88, 1383–1394, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-88-9-1383, 2007.
Meehl, G. A., Senior, C., Eyring, V., Flato, G., Lamarque, J.-F., Stouffer, R. J., Taylor, K. E., and Schlund, M.: Context for interpreting equilibrium climate sensitivity and transient climate response from the CMIP6 Earth system models, Science Advances, 6, eaba1981, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aba1981, 2020.
Meinshausen, M., Nicholls, Z. R. J., Lewis, J., Gidden, M. J., Vogel, E., Freund, M., Beyerle, U., Gessner, C., Nauels, A., Bauer, N., Canadell, J. G., Daniel, J. S., John, A., Krummel, P. B., Luderer, G., Meinshausen, N., Montzka, S. A., Rayner, P. J., Reimann, S., Smith, S. J., van den Berg, M., Velders, G. J. M., Vollmer, M. K., and Wang, R. H. J.: The shared socio-economic pathway (SSP) greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions to 2500, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3571–3605, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3571-2020, 2020.
Merlis, T. M., Cheng, K.-Y., Guendelman, I., Harris, L., Bretherton, C. S., Bolot, M., Zhou, L., Kaltenbaugh, A., Clark, S. K., Vecchi, G. A., and Fueglistaler, S.: Climate sensitivity and relative humidity changes in global storm-resolving model simulations of climate change, Science Advances, 10, eadn5217, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adn5217, 2024.
Mizielinski, M.: WCRP-CMIP/cmip7-guidance: v0 release (Version v0), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15704713, 2025
Moss, R. H., Edmonds, J. A., Hibbard, K. A., Manning, M. R., Rose, S. K., Van Vuuren, D. P., Carter, T. R., Emori, S., Kainuma, M., Kram, T., and Meehl, G. A.: The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment, Nature, 463, 747–756, 2010.
Myers, T. A., Mechoso, C. R., and DeFlorio, M. J.: Coupling between marine boundary layer clouds and summer-to-summer sea surface temperature variability over the North Atlantic and Pacific, Clim. Dynam., 50, 955–969, 2018.
Nakicenovic, N., Alcamo, J., Grubler, A., Riahi, K., Roehrl, R. A., Rogner, H.-H. , & Victor, N.: Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES), A Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-80493-0, 2000.
Nguyen, P. L., Alexander, L. V., Thatcher, M. J., Truong, S. C. H., Isphording, R. N., and McGregor, J. L.: Selecting CMIP6 global climate models (GCMs) for Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) dynamical downscaling over Southeast Asia using a standardised benchmarking framework, Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7285–7315, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7285-2024, 2024.
Otto-Bliesner, B. L., Braconnot, P., Harrison, S. P., Lunt, D. J., Abe-Ouchi, A., Albani, S., Bartlein, P. J., Capron, E., Carlson, A. E., Dutton, A., Fischer, H., Goelzer, H., Govin, A., Haywood, A., Joos, F., LeGrande, A. N., Lipscomb, W. H., Lohmann, G., Mahowald, N., Nehrbass-Ahles, C., Pausata, F. S. R., Peterschmitt, J.-Y., Phipps, S. J., Renssen, H., and Zhang, Q.: The PMIP4 contribution to CMIP6 – Part 2: Two interglacials, scientific objective and experimental design for Holocene and Last Interglacial simulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3979–4003, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3979-2017, 2017.
Peatier, S., Sanderson, B. M., and Terray, L.: Exploration of diverse solutions for the calibration of imperfect climate models, Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 987–1014, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-987-2024, 2024.
Pincus, R., Forster, P. M., and Stevens, B.: The Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (RFMIP): experimental protocol for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3447–3460, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3447-2016, 2016.
Planton, Y. Y., Guilyardi, E., Wittenberg, A. T., Lee, J., Gleckler, P. J., Bayr, T., McGregor, S., McPhaden, M. J., Power, S., Roehrig, R., Vialard, J., and Voldoire, A.: Evaluating Climate Models with the CLIVAR 2020 ENSO Metrics Package, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E193–E217, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-19-0337.1, 2021.
Riahi, K., Van Vuuren, D. P., Kriegler, E., Edmonds, J., O'Neill, B. C., Fujimori, S., Bauer, N., Calvin, K., Dellink, R., Fricko, O., and Lutz, W.: The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview, Global Environ. Chang., 42, 153–168, 2017.
Roberts, M. J., Reed, K. A., Bao, Q., Barsugli, J. J., Camargo, S. J., Caron, L.-P., Chang, P., Chen, C.-T., Christensen, H. M., Danabasoglu, G., Frenger, I., Fučkar, N. S., ul Hasson, S., Hewitt, H. T., Huang, H., Kim, D., Kodama, C., Lai, M., Leung, L.-Y. R., Mizuta, R., Nobre, P., Ortega, P., Paquin, D., Roberts, C. D., Scoccimarro, E., Seddon, J., Treguier, A. M., Tu, C.-Y., Ullrich, P. A., Vidale, P. L., Wehner, M. F., Zarzycki, C. M., Zhang, B., Zhang, W., and Zhao, M.: High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project phase 2 (HighResMIP2) towards CMIP7, Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1307–1332, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1307-2025, 2025.
Ruane, A. C., Teichmann, C., Arnell, N. W., Carter, T. R., Ebi, K. L., Frieler, K., Goodess, C. M., Hewitson, B., Horton, R., Kovats, R. S., Lotze, H. K., Mearns, L. O., Navarra, A., Ojima, D. S., Riahi, K., Rosenzweig, C., Themessl, M., and Vincent, K.: The Vulnerability, Impacts, Adaptation and Climate Services Advisory Board (VIACS AB v1.0) contribution to CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3493–3515, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3493-2016, 2016.
Rugenstein, M., Bloch-Johnson, J., Gregory, J., Andrews, T., Mauritsen, T., Li, C., Frölicher, T. L., Paynter, D., Danabasoglu, G., Yang, S., Dufresne, J., Cao, L., Schmidt, G. A., Abe-Ouchi, A., Geoffroy, O., and Knutti, R.: Equilibrium climate sensitivity estimated by equilibrating climate models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2019GL083898, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019gl083898, 2019.
Rugenstein, M., Dhame, S., Olonscheck, D., Wills, R. J., Watanabe, M., and Seager, R.: Connecting the SST pattern problem and the Hot model problem, Geophys. Res. Lett., 50, e2023GL105488, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023gl105488, 2023.
Sanderson, B. M., Wehner, M., and Knutti, R.: Skill and independence weighting for multi-model assessments, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2379–2395, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2379-2017, 2017.
Sanderson, B. M., Booth, B. B. B., Dunne, J., Eyring, V., Fisher, R. A., Friedlingstein, P., Gidden, M. J., Hajima, T., Jones, C. D., Jones, C. G., King, A., Koven, C. D., Lawrence, D. M., Lowe, J., Mengis, N., Peters, G. P., Rogelj, J., Smith, C., Snyder, A. C., Simpson, I. R., Swann, A. L. S., Tebaldi, C., Ilyina, T., Schleussner, C.-F., Séférian, R., Samset, B. H., van Vuuren, D., and Zaehle, S.: The need for carbon-emissions-driven climate projections in CMIP7, Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8141–8172, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8141-2024, 2024a.
Sanderson, B. M., Brovkin, V., Fisher, R., Hohn, D., Ilyina, T., Jones, C., Koenigk, T., Koven, C., Li, H., Lawrence, D., Lawrence, P., Liddicoat, S., Macdougall, A., Mengis, N., Nicholls, Z., O'Rourke, E., Romanou, A., Sandstad, M., Schwinger, J., Seferian, R., Sentman, L., Simpson, I., Smith, C., Steinert, N., Swann, A., Tjiputra, J., and Ziehn, T.: flat10MIP: An emissions-driven experiment to diagnose the climate response to positive, zero, and negative CO2 emissions, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3356, 2024b.
Schmidt, G. A., Andrews, T., Bauer, S. E., Durack, P. J., Loeb, N. G., Ramaswamy, V., Arnold, N. P., Bosilovich, M. G., Cole, J., Horowitz, L. W., Johnson, G. C., Lyman, J. M., Medeiros, B., Michibata, T., Olonscheck, D., Paynter, D., Raghuraman, S. P., Schulz, M., Takasuka, D., Tallapragada, V., Taylor, P. C., and Ziehn, T.: CERESMIP: a climate modeling protocol to investigate recent trends in the Earth's Energy Imbalance, Frontiers in Climate, 5, 1202161, https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2023.1202161, 2023a.
Schmidt, G. A., Romanou, A., Roach, L. A., Mankoff, K. D., Li, Q., Rye, C. D., Kelley, M., Marshall, J. C., and Busecke, J. J. M.: Anomalous meltwater from ice sheets and ice shelves is a historical forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 50, 2023GL106530, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023gl106530, 2023b.
Schmidt, G. A., Mankoff, K. D., Bamber, J. L., Carroll, D., Chandler, D. M., Coulon, V., Davison, B. J., England, M. H., Holland, P. R., Jourdain, N. C., Li, Q., Marson, J. M., Mathiot, P., McMahon, C. R., Moon, T. A., Mottram, R., Nowicki, S., Olivé Abelló, A., Pauling, A. G., Rackow, T., and Ringeisen, D.: Datasets and protocols for including anomalous freshwater from melting ice sheets in climate simulations, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1940, 2025.
Seager, R., Cane, M., Henderson, N., Lee, D.-E., Abernathey, R., and Zhang, H.: Strengthening tropical Pacific zonal sea surface temperature gradient consistent with rising greenhouse gases, Nat. Clim. Change, 9, 517–522, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0505-x, 2019.
Seager, R., Henderson, N., and Cane, M.: Persistent Discrepancies between Observed and Modeled Trends in the Tropical Pacific Ocean, J. Climate, 35, 4571–4584, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-21-0648.1, 2022.
Séférian, R., Gehlen, M., Bopp, L., Resplandy, L., Orr, J. C., Marti, O., Dunne, J. P., Christian, J. R., Doney, S. C., Ilyina, T., Lindsay, K., Halloran, P. R., Heinze, C., Segschneider, J., Tjiputra, J., Aumont, O., and Romanou, A.: Inconsistent strategies to spin up models in CMIP5: implications for ocean biogeochemical model performance assessment, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1827–1851, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1827-2016, 2016.
Seneviratne, S. I. and Hauser, M.: Regional Climate sensitivity of climate Extremes in CMIP6 versus CMIP5 multimodel ensembles, Earths Future, 8, e2019EF001474, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019ef001474, 2020.
Sentman, L. T., Shevliakova, E., Stouffer, R. J., and Malyshev, S.: Time scales of terrestrial carbon response related to Land-Use Application: Implications for initializing an Earth System model, Earth Interact., 15, 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1175/2011ei401.1, 2011.
Sime, L. C., Sivankutty, R., Vallet-Malmierca, I., de Boer, A. M., and Sicard, M.: Summer surface air temperature proxies point to near-sea-ice-free conditions in the Arctic at 127 ka, Clim. Past, 19, 883–900, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-19-883-2023, 2023.
Simpson, I. R. and Polvani, L. M.: Revisiting the relationship between jet position, forced response, and annular mode variability in the southern midlatitudes, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 2896–2903, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016gl067989, 2016.
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.
Soden, B. J., Held, I. M., Colman, R., Shell, K. M., Kiehl, J. T., and Shields, C. A.: Quantifying climate feedbacks using radiative kernels, J. Climate, 21, 3504–3520, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007jcli2110.1, 2018.
Soden, B. J., Collins, W. D., and Feldman, D. R.: Reducing uncertainties in climate models, Science, 361, 326–327, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau1864, 2018.
Stevens, B.: A perspective on the future of CMIP, AGU Advances, 5, e2023AV001086, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023av001086, 2024.
Swaminathan, R., Schewe, J., Walton, J., Zimmermann, K., Jones, C., Betts, R. A., Burton, C., Jones, C. D., Mengel, M., Reyer, C. P. O., Turner, A. G., and Weigel, K.: Regional impacts poorly constrained by climate sensitivity, Earths Future, 12, e2024EF004901, https://doi.org/10.1029/2024ef004901, 2024.
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 485–498, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-11-00094.1, 2011.
Toohey, M. and Sigl, M.: Volcanic stratospheric sulfur injections and aerosol optical depth from 500 BCE to 1900 CE, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 9, 809–831, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-9-809-2017, 2017.
van den Hurk, B., Kim, H., Krinner, G., Seneviratne, S. I., Derksen, C., Oki, T., Douville, H., Colin, J., Ducharne, A., Cheruy, F., Viovy, N., Puma, M. J., Wada, Y., Li, W., Jia, B., Alessandri, A., Lawrence, D. M., Weedon, G. P., Ellis, R., Hagemann, S., Mao, J., Flanner, M. G., Zampieri, M., Materia, S., Law, R. M., and Sheffield, J.: LS3MIP (v1.0) contribution to CMIP6: the Land Surface, Snow and Soil moisture Model Intercomparison Project – aims, setup and expected outcome, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2809–2832, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2809-2016, 2016.
van Vuuren, D., O'Neill, B., Tebaldi, C., Chini, L., Friedlingstein, P., Hasegawa, T., Riahi, K., Sanderson, B., Govindasamy, B., Bauer, N., Eyring, V., Fall, C., Frieler, K., Gidden, M., Gohar, L., Jones, A., King, A., Knutti, R., Kriegler, E., Lawrence, P., Lennard, C., Lowe, J., Mathison, C., Mehmood, S., Prado, L., Zhang, Q., Rose, S., Ruane, A., Schleussner, C.-F., Seferian, R., Sillmann, J., Smith, C., Sörensson, A., Panickal, S., Tachiiri, K., Vaughan, N., Vishwanathan, S., Yokohata, T., and Ziehn, T.: The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP7 (ScenarioMIP-CMIP7), EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3765, 2025.
Van Vuuren, D. P., Edmonds, J., Kainuma, M., Riahi, K., Thomson, A., Hibbard, K., Hurtt, G. C., Kram, T., Krey, V., Lamarque, J. F., and Masui, T.: The representative concentration pathways: an overview, Climatic Change, 109, 5–31, 2011.
Visioni, D., Robock, A., Haywood, J., Henry, M., Tilmes, S., MacMartin, D. G., Kravitz, B., Doherty, S. J., Moore, J., Lennard, C., Watanabe, S., Muri, H., Niemeier, U., Boucher, O., Syed, A., Egbebiyi, T. S., Séférian, R., and Quaglia, I.: G6-1.5K-SAI: a new Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) experiment integrating recent advances in solar radiation modification studies, Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2583–2596, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2583-2024, 2024.
Warszawski, L., Frieler, K., Huber, V., Piontek, F., Serdeczny, O., and Schewe, J.: The Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI–MIP): Project framework, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, 3228–3232, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1312330110, 2013.
Washington, W. M. and Meehl, G. A.: Climate sensitivity due to increased CO2: experiments with a coupled atmosphere and ocean general circulation model, Clim. Dynam., 4, 1–38, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00207397, 1989.
Watanabe, M., Kang, S. M., Collins, M., Hwang, Y.-T., McGregor, S., and Stuecker, M. F.: Possible shift in controls of the tropical Pacific surface warming pattern, Nature, 630, 315–324, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07452-7, 2024.
WCRP: A WCRP vision for accessible, useful and reliable climate modeling systems, Report of the Future of Climate Modeling Workshop, WCRP Publication no. 03/2023, https://www.wcrp-climate.org/WCRP-publications/2023/Final_Report_WCRP_FCM_Workshop.pdf (last access: 15 September 2025), 2023.
Webb, M. J., Andrews, T., Bodas-Salcedo, A., Bony, S., Bretherton, C. S., Chadwick, R., Chepfer, H., Douville, H., Good, P., Kay, J. E., Klein, S. A., Marchand, R., Medeiros, B., Siebesma, A. P., Skinner, C. B., Stevens, B., Tselioudis, G., Tsushima, Y., and Watanabe, M.: The Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project (CFMIP) contribution to CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 359–384, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-359-2017, 2017.
Wills, R. C. J., Dong, Y., Proistosecu, C., Armour, K. C., and Battisti, D. S.: Systematic climate model biases in the Large-Scale patterns of recent Sea-Surface temperature and Sea-Level pressure change, Geophys. Res. Lett., 49, e2022GL100011, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022gl100011, 2022.
Wood, R. A., Crucifix, M., Lenton, T. M., Mach, K. J., Moore, C., New, M., Sharpe, S., Stocker, T. F., and Sutton, R. T.: A Climate Science Toolkit for High Impact-Low Likelihood Climate Risks, Earths Future, 11, e2022EF003369, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022ef003369, 2023.
Yamazaki, K., Sexton, D. M. H., Rostron, J. W., McSweeney, C. F., Murphy, J. M., and Harris, G. R.: A perturbed parameter ensemble of HadGEM3-GC3.05 coupled model projections: part 2: global performance and future changes, Clim. Dynam., 56, 3437–3471, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05608-5, 2021.
Yeager, S. G., Chang, P., Danabasoglu, G., Rosenbloom, N., Zhang, Q., Castruccio, F. S., Gopal, A., Rencurrel, M. C., and Simpson, I. R.: Reduced Southern Ocean warming enhances global skill and signal-to-noise in an eddy-resolving decadal prediction system, Npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 6, 107, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-023-00434-y, 2023.
Zappa, G. and Shepherd, T. G.: Storylines of atmospheric circulation change for European Regional Climate Impact Assessment, J. Climate, 30, 6561–6577, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-16-0807.1, 2017.
Zelinka, M. D., Myers, T. A., McCoy, D. T., Po-Chedley, S., Caldwell, P. M., Ceppi, P., Klein, S. A., and Taylor, K. E.: Causes of higher climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2019GL085782, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019gl085782, 2020.
Executive editor
The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project lies at the core of global climate prediction. This paper details the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 7 (CMIP7) and its Fast Track initiative. By transitioning into a continuous climate modeling program with enhanced coordination and federated planning, CMIP7 aims to address key climate questions more effectively. The expansion of the Diagnostic, Evaluation, and Characterization of Klima (DECK) experiments—including the addition of historical simulations, effective radiative forcing assessments, and CO₂-emissions-driven experiments—strengthens the foundation for climate model evaluation and projection. Additionally, the AR7 Fast Track ensures timely delivery of critical climate simulation data to support the upcoming 7th Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Report. This paper highlights how these advancements in experimental protocols and infrastructure support not only scientific understanding but also inform policy-making and climate services, ultimately contributing to global efforts in climate adaptation and mitigation.
The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project lies at the core of global climate prediction. This...
Short summary
The seventh phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7) coordinates efforts to answer key and timely climate science questions and facilitate delivery of relevant multi-model simulations for prediction and projection; characterization, attribution, and process understanding; and vulnerability, impact, and adaptation analysis. Key to the CMIP7 design are the mandatory Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima and optional Assessment Fast Track experiments.
The seventh phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7) coordinates efforts to...
Special issue