Radiative forcing in the ACCMIP historical and future climate simulations

被引:328
|
作者
Shindell, D. T. [1 ,2 ]
Lamarque, J. -F. [3 ]
Schulz, M. [4 ]
Flanner, M. [5 ]
Jiao, C. [5 ]
Chin, M. [6 ]
Young, P. J. [7 ,8 ]
Lee, Y. H. [1 ,2 ]
Rotstayn, L. [9 ]
Mahowald, N. [10 ]
Milly, G. [1 ,2 ]
Faluvegi, G. [1 ,2 ]
Balkanski, Y. [11 ]
Collins, W. J. [12 ]
Conley, A. J. [3 ]
Dalsoren, S. [13 ]
Easter, R. [14 ]
Ghan, S. [14 ]
Horowitz, L. [15 ]
Liu, X. [14 ]
Myhre, G. [13 ]
Nagashima, T. [16 ]
Naik, V. [17 ]
Rumbold, S. T. [12 ]
Skeie, R. [13 ]
Sudo, K. [18 ]
Szopa, S. [11 ]
Takemura, T. [19 ]
Voulgarakis, A. [1 ,2 ,20 ]
Yoon, J. -H. [14 ]
Lo, F. [10 ]
机构
[1] NASA, Goddard Inst Space Studies, New York, NY 10025 USA
[2] Columbia Earth Inst, New York, NY USA
[3] Natl Ctr Atmospher Res, Boulder, CO 80307 USA
[4] Inst Meteorol, Oslo, Norway
[5] Univ Michigan, Dept Atmospher Ocean & Space Sci, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[6] NASA, Goddard Space Flight Ctr, Greenbelt, MD 20771 USA
[7] Univ Colorado, Cooperat Inst Res Environm Sci, Boulder, CO 80309 USA
[8] NOAA, Earth Syst Res Lab, Boulder, CO USA
[9] CSIRO Marine & Atmospher Res, Ctr Australian Weather & Climate Res, Aspendale, Vic, Australia
[10] Cornell Univ, Dept Earth & Atmospher Sci, Ithaca, NY USA
[11] IPSL, LSCE, Gif Sur Yvette, France
[12] Hadley Ctr, Met Off, Exeter, Devon, England
[13] CICERO, Oslo, Norway
[14] Pacific NW Natl Lab, Richland, WA 99352 USA
[15] NOAA, Geophys Fluid Dynam Lab, Princeton, NJ USA
[16] Natl Inst Environm Studies, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
[17] NOAA, UCAR, Geophys Fluid Dynam Lab, Princeton, NJ USA
[18] Nagoya Univ, Grad Sch Environm Studies, Dept Earth & Environm Sci, Nagoya, Aichi 4648601, Japan
[19] Kyushu Univ, Appl Mech Res Inst, Fukuoka 8168580, Japan
[20] Univ London Imperial Coll Sci Technol & Med, Dept Phys, London, England
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
REPRESENTATIVE CONCENTRATION PATHWAYS; ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY; BLACK CARBON; MODEL DESCRIPTION; AEROSOL; PREINDUSTRIAL; SENSITIVITY; DISTRIBUTIONS; EMISSIONS; RAINFALL;
D O I
10.5194/acp-13-2939-2013
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) examined the short-lived drivers of climate change in current climate models. Here we evaluate the 10 ACCMIP models that included aerosols, 8 of which also participated in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5). The models reproduce present-day total aerosol optical depth (AOD) relatively well, though many are biased low. Contributions from individual aerosol components are quite different, however, and most models underestimate east Asian AOD. The models capture most 1980-2000 AOD trends well, but underpredict increases over the Yellow/Eastern Sea. They strongly underestimate absorbing AOD in many regions. We examine both the direct radiative forcing (RF) and the forcing including rapid adjustments (effective radiative forcing; ERF, including direct and indirect effects). The models' all-sky 1850 to 2000 global mean annual average total aerosol RF is (mean; range) -0.26 Wm(-2); -0.06 to -0.49 Wm(-2). Screening based on model skill in capturing observed AOD yields a best estimate of -0.42 Wm(-2); -0.33 to -0.50 Wm(-2), including adjustment for missing aerosol components in some models. Many ACCMIP and CMIP5 models appear to produce substantially smaller aerosol RF than this best estimate. Climate feedbacks contribute substantially (35 to -58%) to modeled historical aerosol RF. The 1850 to 2000 aerosol ERF is -1.17 Wm(-2); -0.71 to -1.44 Wm(-2). Thus adjustments, including clouds, typically cause greater forcing than direct RF. Despite this, the multi-model spread relative to the mean is typically the same for ERF as it is for RF, or even smaller, over areas with substantial forcing. The largest 1850 to 2000 negative aerosol RF and ERF values are over and near Europe, south and east Asia and North America. ERF, however, is positive over the Sahara, the Karakoram, high Southern latitudes and especially the Arctic. Global aerosol RF peaks in most models around 1980, declining thereafter with only weak sensitivity to the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP). One model, however, projects approximately stable RF levels, while two show increasingly negative RF due to nitrate (not included in most models). Aerosol ERF, in contrast, becomes more negative during 1980 to 2000. During this period, increased Asian emissions appear to have a larger impact on aerosol ERF than European and North American decreases due to their being upwind of the large, relatively pristine Pacific Ocean. There is no clear relationship between historical aerosol ERF and climate sensitivity in the CMIP5 subset of ACCMIP models. In the ACCMIP/CMIP5 models, historical aerosol ERF of about -0.8 to -1.5 Wm(-2) is most consistent with observed historical warming. Aerosol ERF masks a large portion of greenhouse forcing during the late 20th and early 21st century at the global scale. Regionally, aerosol ERF is so large that net forcing is negative over most industrialized and biomass burning regions through 1980, but remains strongly negative only over east and southeast Asia by 2000. Net forcing is strongly positive by 1980 over most deserts, the Arctic, Australia, and most tropical oceans. Both the magnitude of and area covered by positive forcing expand steadily thereafter.
引用
收藏
页码:2939 / 2974
页数:36
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Historical evolution of radiative forcing of climate
    Myhre, G
    Myhre, A
    Stordal, F
    [J]. ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2001, 35 (13) : 2361 - 2373
  • [2] Radiative forcing of climate by historical land cover change
    Matthews, HD
    Weaver, AJ
    Eby, M
    Meissner, KJ
    [J]. GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2003, 30 (02) : 27 - 1
  • [3] Tropospheric ozone changes, radiative forcing and attribution to emissions in the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP)
    Stevenson, D. S.
    Young, P. J.
    Naik, V.
    Lamarque, J. -F.
    Shindell, D. T.
    Voulgarakis, A.
    Skeie, R. B.
    Dalsoren, S. B.
    Myhre, G.
    Berntsen, T. K.
    Folberth, G. A.
    Rumbold, S. T.
    Collins, W. J.
    MacKenzie, I. A.
    Doherty, R. M.
    Zeng, G.
    van Noije, T. P. C.
    Strunk, A.
    Bergmann, D.
    Cameron-Smith, P.
    Plummer, D. A.
    Strode, S. A.
    Horowitz, L.
    Lee, Y. H.
    Szopa, S.
    Sudo, K.
    Nagashima, T.
    Josse, B.
    Cionni, I.
    Righi, M.
    Eyring, V.
    Conley, A.
    Bowman, K. W.
    Wild, O.
    Archibald, A.
    [J]. ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS, 2013, 13 (06) : 3063 - 3085
  • [4] Sensitivity of Historical Climate Simulations to Uncertain Aerosol Forcing
    Dittus, Andrea J.
    Hawkins, Ed
    Wilcox, Laura J.
    Sutton, Rowan T.
    Smith, Christopher J.
    Andrews, Martin B.
    Forster, Piers M.
    [J]. GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2020, 47 (13)
  • [5] Evaluating Climate Model Simulations of the Radiative Forcing and Radiative Response at Earth's Surface
    Kramer, Ryan J.
    Soden, Brian J.
    Pendergrass, Angeline G.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLIMATE, 2019, 32 (13) : 4089 - 4102
  • [6] Constraints on radiative forcing and future climate change from observations and climate model ensembles
    Knutti, R
    Stocker, TF
    Joos, F
    Plattner, GK
    [J]. NATURE, 2002, 416 (6882) : 719 - 723
  • [7] Constraints on radiative forcing and future climate change from observations and climate model ensembles
    Reto Knutti
    Thomas F. Stocker
    Fortunat Joos
    Gian-Kasper Plattner
    [J]. Nature, 2002, 416 : 719 - 723
  • [8] Radiative Forcing of Climate Change
    Keith P. Shine
    [J]. Space Science Reviews, 2000, 94 : 363 - 373
  • [9] Radiative forcing of climate change
    Shine, KP
    [J]. SPACE SCIENCE REVIEWS, 2000, 94 (1-2) : 363 - 373
  • [10] Radiative forcing and climate response
    Hansen, J
    Sato, M
    Ruedy, R
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES, 1997, 102 (D6) : 6831 - 6864