NOAA MAPP CMIP5 Task Force Overview Jim Kinter COLA & GMU IGIM CMIP5 Workshop 4 October 2012.
The Last Millennium PMIP3/CMIP5 and PCMIP experiment for...
Transcript of The Last Millennium PMIP3/CMIP5 and PCMIP experiment for...
The Last Millennium PMIP3/CMIP5 andPCMIP experiment for IPCC AR5 and the
Perspec>ves
PAGES ‐ 1st Asia 2k Workshop(26 Aug. 2010, Nagoya University)
M. Yoshimori*, A. Abe‐Ouchi,AORI, U. of Tokyo, Japan
T. SueyoshiRIGC, JAMSTEC, Japan
PMIP : Objectives and Strategy
Supported by WCRP/CLIVAR and IGBP/PAGES Reporting to international bodies :
WGCM : S. Joussaume then P. Braconnot; PAGES : B. Otto-Bliesner; AIMES : A. Abe-Ouchi; INQUA/PALCOM: S. Harrison
Objectives: Understand mechanisms of past climate change Evaluate the ability of climate models to simulate climate different
from that of today Evaluate roles of feedbacks from the different climate subsystems
(atmosphere, ocean, land-surface, sea-ice …) How :
Simulations with state of the art climate models for key periods inthe past (GCM and EMICS)
Data syntheses Model-data comparisons
(slide from PMIP steering committee)
PMIP and PCMIPPMIP and PCMIP• PMIP I (c.a. 1991~2001) contributed to IPCC TAR
– 6 ka & 21 ka
• AGCM + prescribed SST+sea ice
• AGCM + slab mixed‐layer ocean
• PMIP II (c.a. 2002~2007) contributed to IPCC AR4
– 6 ka & 21 ka
• AO(V)GCM
• PMIP III (2009~): AO(V)GCM or ESM will contribute to IPCCAR5
– CMIP5 Tier1: 6 ka & 21 ka
– CMIP5 Tier2: last millennium (850 A.D. – 1850 A.D.)
– 8.2ka, last interglacial, mid‐Pliocene
– PCMIP: with carbon cycle
• last millennium diagnos^c/prognos^c CO2
• LGM diagnos^c CO2PMIP3 workshop will be held in December 2010 in Kyoto, Japan.It is not a modelling community but a modelling and data community.
IPCC AR4: LM Modelling with EMICsIPCC AR4: LM Modelling with EMICs
Need to investigate also regional climate variations of the LM with GCMs
Personal Perspec^ve: Mo^va^on andPersonal Perspec^ve: Mo^va^on andAimsAims of the Last Millennium Simula^onof the Last Millennium Simula^on• Reconstruc^ons provide
• informa^on on the level of natural variability and place the recentwarming in the long‐term perspec^ve.
• Informa^on on past clima^c events and excursions
• Models should
– quan^fy rela^ve strength of unforced internal variability andexternally forced change, which is useful for proxy data interpreta^on
– iden^fy causes of observed variabili^es (e.g., stochas^c/inernal, solar,or volcano?)
– quan^fy natural and anthropogenic contribu^ons (incl. glaciers etc.)
– be tested in its viability of simula^ng natural variability, on whichdetec^on and acribu^on are based
– provide insight on mul^‐decadal to centennial variability, for whichinstrumental records are too short
• Interpreta^on and conclusion drawn from models must be consistent withavailable reconstruc^ons.
PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (1)PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (1)
1. Solar forcing Varied 4 reconstruc^ons
2. Volcanic forcing Varied 2 reconstruc^ons
3. Trace gases Varied
4. Orbital forcing Varied according to Berger(1988)
Parameters computed orprovided
5. land‐sea mask andtopography
Same as in CMIP5preindustrial
6. Land ice Same as in CMIP5preindustrial
7. Land use change Pongratz et al. (2006),available aher 800 A.D.
Op^onal
8. Solar‐driven ozonechanges
Shindell et al. (2006) provideparameteriza^on
Op^onal
9. Tropospheric aerosols Biomass burning? Op^onal
PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (2)PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (2)
1. Solar forcing– satellite observa^ons aher 1978
– solar (magne^c) ac^vity is not equivalent to varia^ons insolar radia^ve output
– sunspot number available only aher about 1610– 14C and 10Be affected by geomagne^c field
– 14C affected by carbon cycle, and calibra^on difficultbecause Suess and bomb effect, but neutron monitoravailable only aher about 1950
– 10Be did not agree between Greenland and Antarc^ca, andonly one record from Antarc^ca (South pole) was available.
But, NGRIP and Dome Fuji data became available recently.
PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (3)PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (3)
BCL = Bard(2000)-Crowley(2000)-Lean (1995): typical previous studiesDB = Delaygue and Bard (2009): PMIP3MEA = Muscheler et al. (2007): PMIP3VK = Vieira et al. (2009): PMIP3SBF = Steinhilber et al. (2009) ): PMIP3
PMIP3 forcings are alike, but substantially different from ones typicallyused in previous studies.
PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (4)PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (4)2. Volcanic forcing
– Crowley (2009): 800‐2000A.D., AOD and aerosol effec^veradius in 4 equal‐area zonal bands, 10 days interval
– Gao et al. (2009): 501‐2000A.D., aerosol loading based on 54ice cores, can be converted to AOD in la^tude (10 deg),height (0.5 km), monthly
Sato etal.,1993,updated
PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (5)PMIP3: LM Coordinated Forcing (5)3. Trace gases: use data compiled by Fortnut Joos (U. of Bern) based
on ice core records
~1.5 W/m**2
~0.2 W/m**2
~0.3 W/m**2
Ques^onsQues^ons
• What is the impact of the two volcanic forcingreconstruc^ons?
• What is the impact of new solar forcing?
• How is the simulated variability in the NorthPacific region (Asia 2k)?
The followings are all preliminary results!
ModelsModels• MIROC3.2
– IPCC AR4 version of AOGCM
– Atmosphere: T42 (~2.8°x 2.8°)/L20
– Ocean: zonal: 1.4°; merid.: 0.56 to 1.4° /L43+1BBL
– Comp. cost: Max. 30 years / day
– Orbital, Solar=AR4, Volcano=Gao et al., GHG=PMIP3
• MIROC‐lite– EMIC: OGCM (~4°x4°/L35) + 1‐layer atmosphere
– Atmosphere: energy‐moisture balance model
– Comp. cost: 2000 years / day
– Sensi^vity experiments to different forcing
A GCM Simula^on of the LastA GCM Simula^on of the LastMillennium with EMIC runsMillennium with EMIC runs
w.r.t 1500-1799 average
w.r.t 1881-1910 average
Impact of Volcanic Forcing UncertaintyImpact of Volcanic Forcing Uncertainty
•Some of the disagreement with data are not necessarily due to modeldeficiency but attributable to the uncertainty in volcanic forcingreconstructions.•Still, medieval warm period, if exists, is not captured by thesimulations.
Impact of PMIP3 Solar ForcingImpact of PMIP3 Solar Forcing
w.r.t 1500-1799 average→ Recent warming isunderestimated.
Some of the disagreement with reconstructions with new solarforcing is possibly due to 1) model specific issue or 2) uncertaintyin the forcing.
→ Need to perform a multi-model comparison.
North Pacific Variability in a GCMNorth Pacific Variability in a GCMSimula^on (preindustrial)Simula^on (preindustrial)Observed Simulated
(courtesy of Dr. Mori/Kakushin project)
Observed
Simulated
North Pacific Variability in a LM GCMNorth Pacific Variability in a LM GCMSimula^on (850‐2000A.D.)Simula^on (850‐2000A.D.)
SummarySummary• Coordinated experiments are underway by both
PMIP3/CMIP5 and PCMIP.
• There is a large uncertainty in volcanic forcing, and themodel evalua^on must be done considering the forcinguncertainty.
• Consistency of model simula^ons using new solar forcingof PMIP3 with reconstruc^ons need to be examined withmul^‐models.
• Our model simulates realis^c PDO, and some insight maybe gained if PDO is not exclusively internally‐driven.
• The 1st mode of North Pacific variability synchronizesglobally, and the 2nd mode shows PDO pacern. Need toseparate internal and forced variability.
ENDEND