Attention:The NSF Public Access Repository (PAR) system and access will be unavailable from 5:00 PM ET until 8:00 PM ET on Friday, September 11 due to maintenance. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Different response of surface temperature and air temperature to deforestation in climate models
Abstract. When quantifying temperature changes induced by deforestation (e.g., cooling in high latitudes, warming in low latitudes), satellite data, in situ observations, and climate models differ concerning the height at which the temperature is typically measured/simulated. In this study the effects of deforestation on surface temperature, near-surface air temperature, and lower atmospheric temperature are compared by analyzing the biogeophysical temperature effects of large-scale deforestation in the Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM) separately for local effects (which are only apparent at the location of deforestation) and nonlocal effects (which are also apparent elsewhere). While the nonlocal effects (cooling in most regions) influence the temperature of the surface and lowest atmospheric layer equally, the local effects (warming in the tropics but a cooling in the higher latitudes) mainly affect the temperature of the surface.In agreement with observation-based studies, the local effects on surface and near-surface air temperature respond differently in the MPI-ESM, both concerning the magnitude of local temperature changes and the latitude at which the local deforestation effects turn from a cooling to a warming (at 45–55∘ N for surface temperature and around 35∘ N for near-surface air temperature). Subsequently, our single-model results are compared to model data from multiple climate models from the Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). This inter-model comparison shows that in the northern midlatitudes, both concerning the summer warming and winter cooling, near-surface air temperature is affected by the local effects only about half as strongly as surface temperature. This study shows that the choice of temperature variable has a considerable effect on the observed and simulated temperature change. Studies about the biogeophysical effects of deforestation must carefully choose which temperature to consider.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1702996
PAR ID:
10171484
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Earth System Dynamics
Volume:
10
Issue:
3
ISSN:
2190-4987
Page Range / eLocation ID:
473 to 484
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; (, Journal of Climate)
    null (Ed.)
    Abstract This study investigates the potential effects of historical deforestation in South America using a regional climate model driven with reanalysis data. Two different sources of data were used to quantify deforestation during the 1980s to 2010s, leading to two scenarios of forest loss: smaller but spatially continuous in scenario 1 and larger but spatially scattered in scenario 2. The model simulates a generally warmer and drier local climate following deforestation. Vegetation canopy becomes warmer due to reduced canopy evapotranspiration, and ground becomes warmer due to more radiation reaching the ground. The warming signal for surface air is weaker than for ground and vegetation, likely due to reduced surface roughness suppressing the sensible heat flux. For surface air over deforested areas, the warming signal is stronger for the nighttime minimum temperature and weaker or even becomes a cooling signal for the daytime maximum temperature, due to the strong radiative effects of albedo at midday, which reduces the diurnal amplitude of temperature. The drying signals over deforested areas include lower atmospheric humidity, less precipitation, and drier soil. The model identifies the La Plata basin as a region remotely influenced by deforestation, where a simulated increase of precipitation leads to wetter soil, higher ET, and a strong surface cooling. Over both deforested and remote areas, the deforestation-induced surface climate changes are much stronger in scenario 2 than scenario 1; coarse-resolution data and models (such as in scenario 1) cannot represent the detailed spatial structure of deforestation and underestimate its impact on local and regional climates. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Communications Earth & Environment)
    Abstract Although tree restoration, including reforestation and afforestation, can enhance carbon sequestration and help mitigate climate change, this negative forcing can be strengthened or weakened through non-carbon cycle biogeophysical factors, including atmospheric chemistry. Here, we conduct climate modeling experiments with and without atmospheric chemistry driven by a high-end tree restoration scenario. Under both frameworks, the biogeophysical effects drive global mean warming due to surface darkening. This warming is muted in the Southern Hemisphere due to enhanced evapotranspiration. Furthermore, there is less warming—especially in the Southern Hemisphere—under interactive atmospheric chemistry, largely due to enhanced organic aerosol and cloud effects. Biogeophysical effects mute 45% of the biogeochemical cooling associated with enhanced land carbon storage, which decreases to 24% with atmospheric chemistry (including methane). Thus, higher climate change mitigation potential of tree restoration results from atmospheric chemistry effects, which are not usually considered. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; (, Journal of Hydrometeorology)
    Abstract In this study, we investigate the air temperature response to land-use and land-cover change (LULCC; cropland expansion and deforestation) using subgrid land model output generated by a set of CMIP6 model simulations. Our study is motivated by the fact that ongoing land-use activities are occurring at local scales, typically significantly smaller than the resolvable scale of a grid cell in Earth system models. It aims to explore the potential for a multimodel approach to better characterize LULCC local climatic effects. On an annual scale, the CMIP6 models are in general agreement that croplands are warmer than primary and secondary land (psl; mainly forests, grasslands, and bare ground) in the tropics and cooler in the mid–high latitudes, except for one model. The transition from warming to cooling occurs at approximately 40°N. Although the surface heating potential, which combines albedo and latent heat flux effects, can explain reasonably well the zonal mean latitudinal subgrid temperature variations between crop and psl tiles in the historical simulations, it does not provide a good prediction on subgrid temperature for other land tile configurations (crop vs forest; grass vs forest) under Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 5–8.5 (SSP5–8.5) forcing scenarios. A subset of simulations with the CESM2 model reveals that latitudinal subgrid temperature variation is positively related to variation in net surface shortwave radiation and negatively related to variation in the surface energy redistribution factor, with a dominant role from the latter south of 30°N. We suggest that this emergent relationship can be used to benchmark the performance of land surface parameterizations and for prediction of local temperature response to LULCC. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Earth's Future)
    Abstract Restoring and preserving the world's forests are promising natural pathways to mitigate some aspects of climate change. In addition to regulating atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, forests modify surface and near‐surface air temperatures through biophysical processes. In the eastern United States (EUS), widespread reforestation during the 20th century coincided with an anomalous lack of warming, raising questions about reforestation's contribution to local cooling and climate mitigation. Using new cross‐scale approaches and multiple independent sources of data, we uncovered links between reforestation and the response of both surface and air temperature in the EUS. Ground‐ and satellite‐based observations showed that EUS forests cool the land surface by 1–2°C annually compared to nearby grasslands and croplands, with the strongest cooling effect during midday in the growing season, when cooling is 2–5°C. Young forests (20–40 years) have the strongest cooling effect on surface temperature. Surface cooling extends to the near‐surface air, with forests reducing midday air temperature by up to 1°C compared to nearby non‐forests. Analyses of historical land cover and air temperature trends showed that the cooling benefits of reforestation extend across the landscape. Locations surrounded by reforestation were up to 1°C cooler than neighboring locations that did not undergo land cover change, and areas dominated by regrowing forests were associated with cooling temperature trends in much of the EUS. Our work indicates reforestation contributed to the historically slow pace of warming in the EUS, underscoring reforestation's potential as a local climate adaptation strategy in temperate regions. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; (, Geophysical Research Letters)
    Abstract At most latitudes, the seasonal cycle of zonal‐mean surface air temperature is notably asymmetric: the length of the warming season is not equal to the length of the cooling season. The asymmetry varies spatially, with the cooling season being ∼40 days shorter than the warming season in the subtropics and the warming season being ∼100 days shorter than the cooling season at the poles. Furthermore, the asymmetry differs between the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere. Here, we show that these observed features are broadly captured in a simple model for the evolution of temperature forced by realistic insolation. The model suggests that Earth's orbital eccentricity largely determines the hemispheric contrast, and obliquity broadly dictates the meridional structure. Clouds, atmospheric heat flux convergence, and time‐invariant effective surface heat capacity have minimal impacts on seasonal asymmetry. This simple, first‐order picture has been absent from previous discussions of the surface temperature seasonal cycle. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Text Encoded Conversion
  • XML
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email