* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Separating forcing from feedback
Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup
Global warming controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Atmospheric model wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Global warming hiatus wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Physical impacts of climate change wikipedia , lookup
Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Instrumental temperature record wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Climate forcing, adjustment and feedback Christopher S. Bretherton Atmospheric Sciences and Applied Mathematics University of Washington with help from Matt Wyant Motivation: Mechanisms of PBL cloud response to climate change Photo courtesy Rob Wood The climate sensitivity problem IPCC models match 20C climate, but vary on 21C warming IPCC 2007 2.54.3°C Aerosols partly cancel GHGs 2xCO2 3xCO2 Climate feedbacks: a simple view CO2 atm surf T f C dΔT/dt = N = G – λ-1ΔT, λ = λ0-1(1-f) G (2xCO2) ~ 4 W m-2 λ0-1 ~ 3.3 W m-2 K-1 f ~ 0.6 ± 0.1 (water vapor+LR, snow/ice, clouds) C ~ 3.3x108 J m-2 K-1 for 100 m deep ocean mixed layer covering ¾ of the planet ΔTeq = G/λ ~ 3 K teq = C/λ ~ 8 yrs Complications to the simple view • Multiple response timescales internal atmospheric adjustment (days-weeks) land surface physical adjustment (weeks-months) ocean mixed-layer (yrs-decades) biological/carbon-cycle (decades-100s yrs) deep ocean/thermohaline (100s-1000s yrs) ice sheets (100s-1000s yrs) Scope of feedback analysis depends on the timescale • GHGs and aerosols don’t just change climate through their effects on global average surface ΔT Linear scaling of gross climate change with ΔT IPCC 2007 For a given model, many aspects of climate change do scale with ΔT in IPCC scenario runs. However, not all perturbations fit this mold • Seasonal cycle (large changes in hemispheric T with little change in global-mean T) • ENSO • Aerosol forcing (mainly in NH, so induces hemispheric cooling anomaly) Thus, even global-mean changes in clouds, rainfall, etc. may scale differently with ΔT for these perturbations than in greenhouse warming scenarios. Example: Response to step increase in CO2 Traditional AGCM climate sensitivity method: 1. Run AGCM to equilibrium over climatological SSTs 2. Calculate implied net energy flux (Qflux) into the ocean 3. Construct a slab ocean model with this Qflux and climatological ocean mixed layer depth 4. Suddenly double CO2 and run AGCM+SOM to equilibrium (20-50 yrs). Mean surface air temperature increase ΔTeq is the climate sensitivity Net Rad ΔT t ΔT Transient evolution of such runs also relevant ΔT slow CO2 increase 2xCO2 SOM G = log(CO2 increase) Fast response of clouds to radiative changes • Transient behavior of coupled GCM runs in which CO2 is suddenly doubled shows a quick response of the clouds before the climate warms which explains some of the ultimate 2xCO2 cloud feedback. • Quick increase in SWCF (less cloud) after 2xCO2. Gregory and Webb 2008 Adjustment cartoon weeks years Adjustment Temperature feedback time Cloud adjustment to step 2xCO2 is significant (Andrews and Forster 2008) Suggests quick decrease in both low and (to lesser extent) high cloud. Fast adjustments are about 20% of equilibrated cloud response to 2xCO2. After subtracting them out, the T-modulated cloud feedback remains positive in all models and exhibits somewhat reduced spread. Geographical pattern is fairly complex and model-dependent Physical mechanism? 4xCO2 cloud response in superparameterized GCM • Superparameterization - a climate model with a small cloud-resolving (large-eddy simulation) model in place of the normal physical parameterizations in every grid column. • Computationally expensive, but may simulate turbulent clouds (especially deep convection) more realistically. • SP-CAM (Khairoutdinov and Randall 2005) uses 2D CRMs with 32x30 gridpoints, x = 4 km and z ~ 200 m in PBL. • Investigate low cloud response to instantaneous 4xCO2 increase with fixed SST. 4xCO2 fixed SST experiment with SP-CAM • 2½ year integrations are used with the first ½ year discarded...short, but results hold in each of the 2 years. ∆4xCO2 Radiative Heating Cloud SWCF = 0.7 W m-2 less PBL-top cooling warm SST LTS cold SST 4xCO2 ~10 W m-2 more LWdown at low cloud top. Less PBL radiative cooling, less turbulence Shallower inversion, less boundary layer cloud …something we weren’t expecting… Land heats up due to enhanced greenhouse effect despite fixed SST The result… with 4xCO2 but fixed SST Quantitatively… Over land: More rain, clouds, ascent Over ocean: Less rain, clouds, ascent Over full tropics: Less atmos. radiative cooling, thinner low cld Conclusion • CO2 increase causes fast as well as temperaturemediated adjustment that significantly affect clouds and land/ocean interaction. • A careful analysis of GHG feedbacks on temperature needs to account for this adjustment as part of the forcing. This appears to make cloud feedbacks less positive. • In thinking about climate forcing and feedback it is critical to keep in mind the timescale of interest and whether a given control parameter (e.g. global mean surface ΔT) adequately characterizes the evolving system. Fixed Anvil Temperature (FAT) hypothesis • Substantial clear-sky radiative cooling requires water vapor • Upper tropospheric water vapor is temperature-limited. • Clear-sky radiative cooling is weak for T < 200 K. Convective anvil tops will occur near T = 200 K, regardless of surface temperature. Hartmann and Larson 2002 AR4 models, A1B scenario (Zelinka and Hartmann 2010) Vertical cloud profile changes with Ts Kuang and Hartmann 2007: Radiative-convective equilibrium over fixed SST in a cloud-resolving model (CRM). • Entire cloud profile above the freezing level rises 350 m/KSST when plotted vs. z but collapses when plotted vs. T. GCMs do similarly (Zelinka and Hartmann 2010).