Search for: All records

Abstract. This work assesses a recently produced 21-member climate model large ensemble (LE) based on the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) version 2 (E3SM2). The ensemble spans the historical era (1850 to 2014) and 21st century (2015 to 2100), using the SSP370 pathway, allowing for an evaluation of the model's forced response. A companion 500-year preindustrial control simulation is used to initialize the ensemble and estimate drift. Characteristics of the LE are documented and compared against other recently produced ensembles using the E3SM version 1 (E3SM1) and Community Earth System Model (CESM) versions 1 and 2. Simulation drift is found to be smaller, and model agreement with observations is higher in versions 2 of E3SM and CESM versus their version 1 counterparts. Shortcomings in E3SM2 include a lack of warming from the mid to late 20th century, likely due to excessive cooling influence of anthropogenic sulfate aerosols, an issue also evident in E3SM1. Associated impacts on the water cycle and energy budgets are also identified. Considerable model dependence in the response to both aerosols and greenhouse gases is documented and E3SM2's sensitivity to variable prescribed biomass burning emissions is demonstrated. Various E3SM2 and CESM2 model benchmarks are found to be on par with the highest-performing recent generation of climate models, establishing the E3SM2 LE as an important resource for estimating climate variability and responses, though with various caveats as discussed herein. As an illustration of the usefulness of LEs in estimating the potential influence of internal variability, the observed CERES-era trend in net top-of-atmosphere flux is compared to simulated trends and found to be much larger than the forced response in all LEs, with only a few members exhibiting trends as large as observed, thus motivating further study. 

Abstract There is a growing demand for understanding sources of predictability on subseasonal to seasonal (S2S) time scales. Predictability at subseasonal time scales is believed to come from processes varying slower than the atmosphere such as soil moisture, snowpack, sea ice, and ocean heat content. The stratosphere as well as tropospheric modes of variability can also provide predictability at subseasonal time scales. However, the contributions of the above sources to S2S predictability are not well quantified. Here we evaluate the subseasonal prediction skill of the Community Earth System Model, version 1 (CESM1), in the default version of the model as well as a version with the improved representation of stratospheric variability to assess the role of an improved stratosphere on prediction skill. We demonstrate that the subseasonal skill of CESM1 for surface temperature and precipitation is comparable to that of operational models. We find that a better-resolved stratosphere improves stratospheric but not surface prediction skill for weeks 3–4. 

Abstract Observational analysis has indicated a strong connection between the stratospheric quasi‐biennial oscillation (QBO) and tropospheric Madden‐Julian oscillation (MJO), with MJO activity being stronger during the easterly phase than the westerly phase of the QBO. We assess the representation of this QBO‐MJO connection in 30 models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6. While some models reasonably simulate the QBO during boreal winter, none of them capture a difference in MJO activity between easterly and westerly QBO that is larger than that which would be expected from the random sampling of internal variability. The weak signal of the simulated QBO‐MJO connection may be due to the weaker amplitude of the QBO than observed, especially between 100 to 50 hPa. This weaker amplitude in the models is seen both in the QBO‐related zonal wind and temperature, the latter of which is thought to be critical for destabilizing tropical convection.