Search for: All records

Abstract Arctic amplification (AA), the greater Arctic surface warming compared to the global average, has been widely attributed to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHG). However, less is known about the impacts of other forcings - notably, anthropogenic aerosols (AER) - and how they may compare to the impacts of GHG. Here we analyze sets of climate model simulations, specifically designed to isolate the AER and GHG effects on global climate. Surprisingly, we find stronger AA produced by AER than by GHG during the 1955–1984 period, when the strongest global AER increase. This stronger AER-induced AA is due to a greater sensitivity of Arctic sea ice, and associated changes in ocean-to-atmosphere heat exchange, to AER forcing. Our findings highlight the asymmetric Arctic climate response to GHG and AER forcings, and show that clean air policies which have reduced aerosol emissions may have exacerbated the Arctic warming over the past few decades. 

Abstract Arctic amplification (AA), referring to the phenomenon of amplified warming in the Arctic compared to the warming in the rest of the globe, is generally attributed to the increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO₂) in the atmosphere. However, little attention has been paid to the mechanisms and quantitative variations of AA under decreasing levels of CO₂, when cooling where the Arctic region is considerably larger than over the rest of the planet. Analyzing climate model experiments forced with a wide range of CO₂concentrations (from 1/8× to 8×CO₂, with respect to preindustrial levels), we show that AA indeed occurs under decreasing CO₂concentrations, and it is stronger than AA under increasing CO₂concentrations. Feedback analysis reveals that the Planck, lapse-rate, and albedo feedbacks are the main contributors to producing AAs forced by CO₂increase and decrease, but the stronger lapse-rate feedback associated with decreasing CO₂level gives rise to stronger AA. We further find that the increasing CO₂concentrations delay the peak month of AA from November to December or January, depending on the forcing strength. In contrast, decreasing CO₂levels cannot shift the peak of AA earlier than October, as a consequence of the maximum sea-ice increase in September which is independent of forcing strength. Such seasonality changes are also presented in the lapse-rate feedback, but do not appear in other feedbacks nor in the atmospheric and oceanic heat transport processeses. Our results highlight the strongly asymmetric responses of AA, as evidenced by the different changes in its intensity and seasonality, to the increasing and decreasing CO₂concentrations. These findings have significant implications for understanding how carbon removal could impact the Arctic climate, ecosystems, and socio-economic activities. 

Abstract Arctic amplification (AA), defined as the enhanced warming of the Arctic compared to the global average, is a robust feature of historical observations and simulations of future climate. Despite many studies investigating AA mechanisms, their relative importance remains contested. In this study, we examine the different timescales of these mechanisms to improve our understanding of AA’s fundamental causes. We use the Community Earth System Model v1, Large Ensemble configuration (CESM-LE), to generate large ensembles of 2 years simulations subjected to an instantaneous quadrupling of CO₂. We show that AA emerges almost immediately (within days) following CO₂increase and before any significant loss of Arctic sea ice has occurred. Through a detailed energy budget analysis of the atmospheric column, we determine the time-varying contributions of AA mechanisms over the simulation period. Additionally, we examine the dependence of these mechanisms on the season of CO₂quadrupling. We find that the surface heat uptake resulting from the different latent heat flux anomalies between the Arctic and global average, driven by the CO₂forcing, is the most important AA contributor on short (<1 month) timescales when CO₂is increased in January, followed by the lapse rate feedback. The latent heat flux anomaly remains the dominant AA mechanism when CO₂is increased in July and is joined by the surface albedo feedback, although AA takes longer to develop. Other feedbacks and energy transports become relevant on longer (>1 month) timescales. Our results confirm that AA is an inherently fast atmospheric response to radiative forcing and reveal a new AA mechanism. 

Abstract. It has been suggested that increased stratospheric sulfate aerosol loadings following large, low latitude volcanic eruptions can lead to wintertime warming over Eurasia through dynamical stratosphere–troposphere coupling. We here investigate the proposedconnection in the context of hypothetical future stratospheric sulfategeoengineering in the Geoengineering Large Ensemble simulations. In thosegeoengineering simulations, we find that stratospheric circulation anomalies that resemble the positive phase of the Northern Annular Mode in winter are a distinguishing climate response which is absent when increasing greenhouse gases alone are prescribed. This stratospheric dynamical response projects onto the positive phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation, leading to associated side effects of this climate intervention strategy, such as continental Eurasian warming and precipitation changes. Seasonality is a key signature of the dynamically driven surface response. We find an opposite response of the North Atlantic Oscillation in summer, when no dynamical role of the stratosphere is expected. The robustness of the wintertime forced response stands in contrast to previously proposed volcanic responses. 

Abstract This study investigates the stratospheric response to Arctic sea ice loss and subsequent near-surface impacts by analyzing 200-member coupled experiments using the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model version 6 (WACCM6) with preindustrial, present-day, and future sea ice conditions specified following the protocol of the Polar Amplification Model Intercomparison Project. The stratospheric polar vortex weakens significantly in response to the prescribed sea ice loss, with a larger response to greater ice loss (i.e., future minus preindustrial) than to smaller ice loss (i.e., future minus present-day). Following the weakening of the stratospheric circulation in early boreal winter, the coupled stratosphere–troposphere response to ice loss strengthens in late winter and early spring, projecting onto a negative North Atlantic Oscillation–like pattern in the lower troposphere. To investigate whether the stratospheric response to sea ice loss and subsequent surface impacts depend on the background oceanic state, ensemble members are initialized by a combination of varying phases of Atlantic multidecadal variability (AMV) and interdecadal Pacific variability (IPV). Different AMV and IPV states combined, indeed, can modulate the stratosphere–troposphere responses to sea ice loss, particularly in the North Atlantic sector. Similar experiments with another climate model show that, although strong sea ice forcing also leads to tighter stratosphere–troposphere coupling than weak sea ice forcing, the timing of the response differs from that in WACCM6. Our findings suggest that Arctic sea ice loss can affect the stratospheric circulation and subsequent tropospheric variability on seasonal time scales, but modulation by the background oceanic state and model dependence need to be taken into account. Significance StatementThis study uses new-generation climate models to better understand the impacts of Arctic sea ice loss on the surface climate in the midlatitudes, including North America, Europe, and Siberia. We focus on the stratosphere–troposphere pathway, which involves the weakening of stratospheric winds and its downward coupling into the troposphere. Our results show that Arctic sea ice loss can affect the surface climate in the midlatitudes via the stratosphere–troposphere pathway, and highlight the modulations from background mean oceanic states as well as model dependence. 

ABSTRACT To explore the various couplings across space and time and between ecosystems in a consistent manner, atmospheric modeling is moving away from the fractured limited-scale modeling strategy of the past toward a unification of the range of scales inherent in the Earth system. This paper describes the forward-looking Multi-Scale Infrastructure for Chemistry and Aerosols (MUSICA), which is intended to become the next-generation community infrastructure for research involving atmospheric chemistry and aerosols. MUSICA will be developed collaboratively by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and university and government researchers, with the goal of serving the international research and applications communities. The capability of unifying various spatiotemporal scales, coupling to other Earth system components, and process-level modularization will allow advances in both fundamental and applied research in atmospheric composition, air quality, and climate and is also envisioned to become a platform that addresses the needs of policy makers and stakeholders. 

Abstract Many studies have documented the trends in the latitudinal position and strength of the midlatitude westerlies in the Southern Hemisphere. However, very little attention has been paid to the longitudinal variations of these trends. Here, we specifically focus on the zonal asymmetries in the southern hemisphere wind trends between 1980 and 2018. Meteorological reanalyses show a large strengthening and a statistically insignificant equatorward shift of peak near‐surface winds over the Pacific, in contrast to a weaker strengthening and significant poleward shift over the Atlantic and Indian Ocean sectors. The reanalysis trends fall within the ensemble spread for historical climate model simulations, showing that climate models are able to capture the observed trends. Climate model simulations indicate that the differential movement of the peak westerlies is a manifestation of internal variability and is not a forced response. Implications of these asymmetries for other components of the climate system are discussed.