We investigate the dependence of radiative feedback on the pattern of sea‐surface temperature (SST) change in 14 Atmospheric General Circulation Models (AGCMs) forced with observed variations in SST and sea‐ice over the historical record from 1871 to near‐present. We find that over 1871–1980, the Earth warmed with feedbacks largely consistent and strongly correlated with long‐term climate sensitivity feedbacks (diagnosed from corresponding atmosphere‐ocean GCM
- Award ID(s):
- 1736738
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10310769
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Climate
- ISSN:
- 0894-8755
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract abrupt‐4xCO2 simulations). Post 1980, however, the Earth warmed with unusual trends in tropical Pacific SSTs (enhanced warming in the west, cooling in the east) and cooling in the Southern Ocean that drove climate feedback to be uncorrelated with—and indicating much lower climate sensitivity than—that expected for long‐term CO2increase. We show that these conclusions are not strongly dependent on the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) II SST data set used to force the AGCMs, though the magnitude of feedback post 1980 is generally smaller in nine AGCMs forced with alternative HadISST1 SST boundary conditions. We quantify a “pattern effect” (defined as the difference between historical and long‐term CO2feedback) equal to 0.48 ± 0.47 [5%–95%] W m−2 K−1for the time‐period 1871–2010 when the AGCMs are forced with HadISST1 SSTs, or 0.70 ± 0.47 [5%–95%] W m−2 K−1when forced with AMIP II SSTs. Assessed changes in the Earth's historical energy budget agree with the AGCM feedback estimates. Furthermore satellite observations of changes in top‐of‐atmosphere radiative fluxes since 1985 suggest that the pattern effect was particularly strong over recent decades but may be waning post 2014. -
Abstract. The main drivers of the continental Northern Hemisphere snow cover are investigated in the 1979–2014 period. Four observational datasets are usedas are two large multi-model ensembles of atmosphere-only simulations with prescribed sea surface temperature (SST) and sea ice concentration (SIC). Afirst ensemble uses observed interannually varying SST and SIC conditions for 1979–2014, while a second ensemble is identical except for SIC witha repeated climatological cycle used. SST and external forcing typically explain 10 % to 25 % of the snow cover variance in modelsimulations, with a dominant forcing from the tropical and North Pacific SST during this period. In terms of the climate influence of the snow coveranomalies, both observations and models show no robust links between the November and April snow cover variability and the atmospheric circulation1 month later. On the other hand, the first mode of Eurasian snow cover variability in January, with more extended snow over western Eurasia, isfound to precede an atmospheric circulation pattern by 1 month, similar to a negative Arctic oscillation (AO). A decomposition of the variabilityin the model simulations shows that this relationship is mainly due to internal climate variability. Detailed outputs from one of the modelsindicate that the western Eurasia snow cover anomalies are preceded by a negative AO phase accompanied by a Ural blocking pattern and astratospheric polar vortex weakening. The link between the AO and the snow cover variability is strongly related to the concomitant role of thestratospheric polar vortex, with the Eurasian snow cover acting as a positive feedback for the AO variability in winter. No robust influence of theSIC variability is found, as the sea ice loss in these simulations only drives an insignificant fraction of the snow cover anomalies, with fewagreements among models.more » « less
-
more » « less
The direct response of the cold-season atmospheric circulation to the Arctic sea ice loss is estimated from observed sea ice concentration (SIC) and an atmospheric reanalysis, assuming that the atmospheric response to the long-term sea ice loss is the same as that to interannual pan-Arctic SIC fluctuations with identical spatial patterns. No large-scale relationship with previous interannual SIC fluctuations is found in October and November, but a negative North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO)/Arctic Oscillation follows the pan-Arctic SIC fluctuations from December to March. The signal is field significant in the stratosphere in December, and in the troposphere and tropopause thereafter. However, multiple regressions indicate that the stratospheric December signal is largely due to concomitant Siberian snow-cover anomalies. On the other hand, the tropospheric January–March NAO signals can be unambiguously attributed to SIC variability, with an Iceland high approaching 45 m at 500 hPa, a 2°C surface air warming in northeastern Canada, and a modulation of blocking activity in the North Atlantic sector. In March, a 1°C northern Europe cooling is also attributed to SIC. An SIC impact on the warm Arctic–cold Eurasia pattern is only found in February in relation to January SIC. Extrapolating the most robust results suggests that, in the absence of other forcings, the SIC loss between 1979 and 2016 would have induced a 2°–3°C decade−1winter warming in northeastern North America and a 40–60 m decade−1increase in the height of the Iceland high, if linearity and perpetual winter conditions could be assumed.
-
more » « less
Abstract In recent decades, Arctic-amplified warming and sea-ice loss coincided with a prolonged wintertime Eurasian cooling trend. This observed Warm Arctic–Cold Eurasia pattern has occasionally been attributed to sea-ice forced changes in the midlatitude atmospheric circulation, implying an anthropogenic cause. However, comprehensive climate change simulations do not produce Eurasian cooling, instead suggesting a role for unforced atmospheric variability. This study seeks to clarify the source of this model-observation discrepancy by developing a statistical approach that enables direct comparison of Arctic-midlatitude interactions. In both historical simulations and observations, we first identify Ural blocking as the primary causal driver of sea ice, temperature, and circulation anomalies consistent with the Warm Arctic–Cold Eurasia pattern. Next, we quantify distinct transient responses to this Ural blocking, which explain the model-observation discrepancy in historical Eurasian temperature. Observed 1988–2012 Eurasian cooling occurs in response to a pronounced positive trend in Ural sea-level pressure, temporarily masking long-term midlatitude warming. This observed sea-level pressure trend lies at the outer edge of simulated variability in a fully coupled large ensemble, where smaller sea-level pressure trends have little impact on the ensemble mean temperature trend over Eurasia. Accounting for these differences bring observed and simulated trends into remarkable agreement. Finally, we quantify the influence of sea-ice loss on the magnitude of the observed Ural sea-level pressure trend, an effect that is absent in historical simulations. These results illustrate that sea-ice loss and tropospheric variability can both play a role in producing Eurasian cooling. Furthermore, by conducting a direct model-observation comparison, we reveal a key difference in the causal structures characterizing the Warm Arctic–Cold Eurasia Pattern, which will guide ongoing efforts to explain the lack of Eurasian cooling in climate change simulations.
-
more » « less
Abstract Arctic amplification has been attributed predominantly to a positive lapse rate feedback in winter, when boundary layer temperature inversions focus warming near the surface. Predicting high-latitude climate change effectively thus requires identifying the local and remote physical processes that set the Arctic’s vertical warming structure. In this study, we analyze output from the CESM Large Ensemble’s twenty-first-century climate change projection to diagnose the relative influence of two Arctic heating sources, local sea ice loss and remote changes in atmospheric heat transport. Causal effects are quantified with a statistical inference method, allowing us to assess the energetic pathways mediating the Arctic temperature response and the role of internal variability across the ensemble. We find that a step-increase in latent heat flux convergence causes Arctic lower-tropospheric warming in all seasons, while additionally reducing net longwave cooling at the surface. However, these effects only lead to small and short-lived changes in boundary layer inversion strength. By contrast, a step-decrease in sea ice extent in the melt season causes, in fall and winter, surface-amplified warming and weakened boundary layer temperature inversions. Sea ice loss also enhances surface turbulent heat fluxes and cloud-driven condensational heating, which mediate the atmospheric temperature response. While the aggregate effect of many moist transport events and seasons of sea ice loss will be different than the response to hypothetical perturbations, our results nonetheless highlight the mechanisms that alter the Arctic temperature inversion in response to CO2forcing. As sea ice declines, the atmosphere’s boundary layer temperature structure is weakened, static stability decreases, and a thermodynamic coupling emerges between the Arctic surface and the overlying troposphere.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0578.1
