Search for: All records

Abstract Convective available potential energy (CAPE) is of strong interest in climate modeling because of its role in both severe weather and in model construction. Extreme levels of CAPE (>2000 J kg −1 ) are associated with high-impact weather events, and CAPE is widely used in convective parameterizations to help determine the strength and timing of convection. However, to date few studies have systematically evaluated CAPE biases in models in a climatological context, and none have addressed bias in the high tail of CAPE distributions. This work compares CAPE distributions in ~200 000 summertime proximity soundings from four sources: the observational radiosonde network [Integrated Global Radiosonde Archive (IGRA)], 0.125° reanalyses (ERA-Interim and ERA5), and a 4-km convection-permitting regional WRF simulation driven by ERA-Interim. Both reanalyses and the WRF Model consistently show too-narrow distributions of CAPE, with the high tail (>90th percentile) systematically biased low by up to 10% in surface-based CAPE and even more in alternate CAPE definitions. This “missing tail” corresponds to the most impacts-relevant conditions. CAPE bias in all datasets is driven by surface temperature and humidity: reanalyses and the WRF Model underpredict observed cases of extreme heat and moisture. These results suggest that reducing inaccuracies in land surface and boundary layer models is critical for accurately reproducing CAPE. 

Abstract. Concerns about food security under climate change motivate efforts to better understand future changes in crop yields.Process-based crop models, which represent plant physiological and soil processes, are necessary tools for this purpose since they allow representing future climate and management conditions not sampled in the historical record and new locations to which cultivation may shift.However, process-based crop models differ in many critical details, and their responses to different interacting factors remain only poorly understood.The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) Phase 2 experiment, an activity of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP), is designed to provide a systematic parameter sweep focused on climate change factors and their interaction with overall soil fertility, to allow both evaluating model behavior and emulating model responses in impact assessment tools.In this paper we describe the GGCMI Phase 2 experimental protocol and its simulation data archive.A total of 12 crop models simulate five crops with systematic uniform perturbations of historical climate, varying CO2, temperature, water supply, and applied nitrogen (“CTWN”) for rainfed and irrigated agriculture, and a second set of simulations represents a type of adaptation by allowing the adjustment of growing season length.We present some crop yield results to illustrate general characteristics of the simulations and potential uses of the GGCMI Phase 2 archive.For example, in cases without adaptation, modeled yields show robust decreases to warmer temperatures in almost all regions, with a nonlinear dependence that means yields in warmer baseline locations have greater temperature sensitivity.Inter-model uncertainty is qualitatively similar across all the four input dimensions but is largest in high-latitude regions where crops may be grown in the future.