Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
aerocom:aerchemmip:start [2014-12-08 09:06:18] michaels |
aerocom:aerchemmip:start [2022-05-31 09:29:31] (current) |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | [[aerocom: | ||
+ | |||
====== AerChemMIP ====== | ====== AerChemMIP ====== | ||
+ | Scientific Steering Group: Bill Collins, Michael Schulz, Jean-François Lamarque, Vaishali Naik, Olivier Boucher, Michaela I. Hegglin, Amanda Maycock, Gunnar Myhre, Michael Prather, Drew Shindell, and Steven J. Smith | ||
- | === Goal === | ||
- | |||
- | |||
- | Past climate change has been forced by a wide range of chemically reactive gases, aerosols, and well mixed greenhouse gases (WMGHGs), in addition to CO2. Scientific questions and uncertainties regarding chemistry-climate interactions range from regional scales (e.g., tropospheric ozone and aerosols interacting with regional meteorology), | ||
- | |||
- | AerChemMIP proposes to contribute to CMIP6 through the following: 1) diagnose forcings and feedbacks involving NTCFs, (namely tropospheric aerosols, tropospheric O3 precursors, and CH4) and the chemically reactive WMGHGs (e.g., N2O, also CH4, and some halocarbons, | ||
- | |||
- | The AerChemMIP Tier 1 simulations focus primarily on understanding atmospheric composition changes (from NTCFs and other chemically-active anthropogenic gases) and their impact on climate. We have devised a series of experiments that contrast the forcing of various NTCFs with that of WMGHGs in historical and future climate change. | ||
- | |||
- | - We do not specifically consider the very long-lived F-gases (SF6, PFCs, and some HFCs) as their abundance is not affected by chemistry on a century time scale. - | ||
- | |||
- | |||
- | === Experiments Tier 1 === | ||
- | |||
- | |||
- | The AerChemMIP Tier 1 simulations focus on three science questions | ||
- | |||
- | 1. How have NTCF and ODS emissions contributed to global ERF and affected regional climate over the historical period? | ||
- | 2. How will future policies (on climate/ | ||
- | 3. How have WMGHGs forced climate (including through their chemical impacts) over the historical period? | ||
- | |||
- | In the following sections, we discuss each question separately and provide for each science question the description of the simulations necessary to answer the stated question. | ||
- | |||
- | 1. How have NTCF and ODS emissions contributed to global ERF and affected regional climate over the historical period? | ||
- | |||
- | Anthropogenic non-CO2 emissions (e.g., NTCFs, GHGs like halocarbons and N2O,…) have led to a climate forcing that is commensurate to CO2-forcing on regional scales, especially over the last few decades. | ||
- | |||
- | By way of their associated large uncertainty in radiative forcing since pre-industrial times, ozone and aerosols in particular are a key factor behind the large uncertainty in constraining climate sensitivity over the record of observed data. These NTCFs have an inhomogeneous spatial distribution and the degree of regional temperature and precipitation responses to such heterogeneous forcing remains an open question within the scientific community. It is further unclear whether NTCFs, which are primarily located at Northern Hemisphere mid latitude land areas have led to a larger climate response there, relative to forcing from WMGHGs. | ||
- | |||
- | One unambiguous regional response to inhomogeneous climate forcing concerns the Southern hemisphere summertime surface circulation changes induced by the Antarctic ozone hole as an indirect response to ozone-depleting halocarbons. These changes have been argued to lead to changes in rainfall patterns, ocean circulation, | ||
- | |||
- | Experiment 1.1: Transient historical coupled ocean climate impacts of NTCFs and of ozone depleting halocarbons (note: this builds on CMIP6-historical-simulation, | ||
- | |||
- | 1.1.1 Perturbation: | ||
- | 1.1.2 Perturbation: | ||
- | |||
- | Experiment 1.2: Estimating ERFs through specified transient historical SST simulations (see note on ERFs below). | ||
- | |||
- | Perform 1850-2014 (1 ensemble member only) simulation with all forcings as in CMIP6 historical but with | ||
- | |||
- | 1.2.1 1850 tropospheric ozone precursor emissions (including biomass burning) 165 years | ||
- | 1.2.2 1850 all NTCF emissions (including biomass burning). 165 years | ||
- | 1.2.3 1950 ODSs. 65 years (1950-2014) | ||
- | |||
- | Experiment 1.3. Time-slice simulations based on the 1850 control SSTs to compute the ERF for 1850 and 2014 for all NTCF and natural aerosols (e.g. AR5 fig 8.15). | ||
- | |||
- | 1.3.1 Control: | ||
- | 1.3.2 Perturbation: | ||
- | 1.3.3. Perturbation: | ||
- | 1.3.4. Perturbation: | ||
- | |||
- | 2. How will future policies (on climate/ | ||
- | |||
- | For the upcoming decades policy makers will be making choices in 3 broadly defined areas 1) climate change policies (targeting mostly WMGHGs), 2) air quality policies (targeting mostly NTCF emissions including CH4 that are precursors of tropospheric aerosols and tropospheric ozone) and 3) land-use policies. | ||
- | |||
- | Experiment 2.1: Transient coupled ocean climate impacts | ||
- | |||
- | 2.1.1 Reference: SSP3-7 (to be performed under ScenarioMIP) | ||
- | 2.1.2 Perturbation: | ||
- | |||
- | Experiment 2.2: Estimating ERFs through fixed-SST simulations (SSTs from 2.1.1) | ||
- | 2.2.1 Control: | ||
- | 40 years, one ensemble | ||
- | 2.2.2 Perturbation: | ||
- | 40 years, one ensemble | ||
- | 2.2.3 Perturbation: | ||
- | 40 years, one ensemble | ||
- | 2.2.4 Perturbation: | ||
- | 40 years, one ensemble | ||
- | 2.2.5 Perturbation: | ||
- | 40 years, one ensemble | ||
+ | The Aerosol Chemistry Model Intercomparison Project (AerChemMIP) is endorsed by the Coupled-Model Intercomparison Project 6 (CMIP6) and is designed to quantify the climate and air quality impacts of aerosols and chemically-reactive gases. These are specifically short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs: methane, tropospheric ozone and aerosols, and their precursors), | ||
- | 3. How have chemically reactive WMGHGs | + | 1. How have anthropogenic emissions contributed to global radiative forcing and affected |
- | Under this question, we focus on estimating the forcing from changes in methane and nitrous oxide on ozone (tropospheric and stratospheric), | + | |
- | Experiment 3.1: Estimating ERFs through specified SST simulations | + | 2. How might future policies |
- | Perform 1850-2015 (1 ensemble member only) simulation with all forcings (and including chemistry feedbacks on tropospheric and stratospheric ozone) as in transient | + | 3. How can uncertainties |
- | 3.1.1 1850 CH4. 165 years | + | 4. How important are climate feedbacks to natural SLCF emissions, atmospheric composition, |
- | 3.1.2 1850 N2O. 165 years | + | |
- | === All Experiments === | + | These questions will be addressed through targeted simulations with CMIP6 climate models that include an interactive representation of tropospheric aerosols and atmospheric chemistry. These simulations build on the CMIP6 Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima (DECK) experiments, |
- | All Experiments | + | ** {{: |
+ | If you are performing an analysis not already listed | ||
- | {{:aerocom:aerchemmip: | + | /* **AerChemMIP/ |
+ | The leads for the topics and the AerChemMIP/ | ||
- | === Model Diagnostics Protocol === | + | **AerChemMIP and RFMIP paper outline (status August 26, 2019)** |
- | Model diagnostics specific to AerChemMIP Tier 1 experiments need to be implemented also in the DECK and CMIP6-historical-simulation. The diagnostics will be contributed to the CMIP6 data request by AerChemMIP. If models have not all components to compute dynamic aerosols, tropospheric or stratospheric chemistry, models are requested to consider using the forcing fields of chemical compounds provided by AerChemMIP when performing AerChemMIP Tier 1 experiments. | + | {{ : |
- | AerChemMIP will contribute to the CMIP6 data request by suggesting aerosol and chemistry related output that is required for model evaluation (including the characterization | + | '' |
+ | */ | ||
- | === Design | + | '' |
- | The proposed simulations combine analysis of the effective radiative forcing (ERF) and the consequent climate impacts of NTCFs. The RF from WMGHGs will be provided by RFMIP. | + | The 30th September 2020 nonetheless remains as a “soft” |
- | The ERFs are calculated by comparing the net TOA radiation fluxes between two runs with the same SSTs but with perturbed NTCF emissions (see below). Internal variability (mainly clouds) generates considerable noise therefore 20 years of simulation are needed to characterize the present day ERF from NTCFs. Alternatively, | + | |
- | For the temperature and precipitation impacts, simulations with a coupled ocean are needed. Again, this requires a pair with and without evolving NTCF emissions in order to compute the impacts. The internal variability in the coupled ocean models is larger than with fixed SSTs, so at least 3 ensemble members will be needed. | + | |
- | The effective radiative forcing (ERF) was introduced in IPCC AR5 [Boucher et al., 2013; Myhre et al., 2013]. The definition is given as follows: | + | Please send papers via email to ar6chapter6papers@ipcc-wg1.fr.'' |
- | Two ways to simulate ERF is currently used, namely; i) net TOA fluxes from fixed-sea surface temperature (SST) simulations and ii) regression of transient temperature response with the initial radiative perturbation [Gregory et al., 2004]. The two methods for simulating ERF are illustrated in [Boucher et al., 2013; Sherwood et al., 2014]. Both ERF methods have their advantages and disadvantages [Boucher et al., 2013; Myhre et al., 2013]. The regression method can be applied to many of the typical CMIP runs, but require long runs (at least 20 years) with a significant radiative perturbation. The fixed-SST method can by applied to relatively small radiative perturbations, | + | **Further AerChemMIP Information**: |
- | The fixed-SSTs approach can further be applied with additional radiation calls to diagnose the various aerosol effects | + | * [[https:// |
+ | * [[http:// | ||
+ | * [[https:// | ||
+ | * [[https:// | ||
+ | * [[https:// | ||
+ | * [[https:// | ||
+ | * [[https:// | ||
+ | * [[aerocom: | ||
+ | * [[http:// | ||
+ | * [[https:// | ||
- | === Scientific Steering Group === | + | /* Experiments overview: |
+ | [[http:// | ||
+ | Analysis: | ||
+ | [[https:// | ||
- | ➢ Co-chairs of MIP | ||
- | William Collins (UK) (W.Collins@reading.ac.uk) | + | **Further CMIP6 Information**: |
- | Jean-François Lamarque (US) (lamar@ucar.edu) | + | |
- | Michael Schulz (Norway) (michael.schulz@met.no) | + | |
- | ➢ Members of the Scientific Steering Committee | + | * [[http:// |
+ | * [[https:// | ||
+ | * [[http:// | ||
+ | * [[https:// | ||
+ | * [[http:// | ||
- | Olivier Boucher (France) (olivier.boucher@lmd.jussieu.fr) | ||
- | Veronika Eyring (Germany) (veronika.eyring@dlr.de) | ||
- | Arlene Fiore (US) (amfiore@ldeo.columbia.edu) | ||
- | Michaela Hegglin (UK) (m.i.hegglin@reading.ac.uk) | ||
- | Gunnar Myhre (Norway) (gunnar.myhre@cicero.oslo.no) | ||
- | Michael Prather (US) (mprather@uci.edu) | ||
- | Drew Shindell (US) (drew.shindell@duke.edu) | ||
- | Steve Smith (US) (ssmith@pnnl.gov) | ||
- | Darryn Waugh (US) (waugh@jhu.edu) | ||
- | === References === | + | **Meetings** |
+ | 3rd Tri-MIP workshop | ||
+ | * Registration | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * Times: 2 hours every day (incl. 1 hour discussion) | ||
+ | * EU 3pm - | ||
+ | * NY 9am - 11am | ||
+ | * CA 6am - 8am | ||
+ | * JP 10pm - 12midnight | ||
+ | * CH 9pm - 11pm | ||
- | Boucher, O., et al. (2013), Clouds and Aerosols, in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by T. F. Stocker, D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P. M. Midgley, pp. 571-657, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. | ||
- | Cionni, I., V. Eyring, J. F. Lamarque, W. J. Randel, D. S. Stevenson, F. Wu, G. E. Bodeker, T. G. Shepherd, D. T. Shindell, and D. W. Waugh (2011), Ozone database in support of CMIP5 simulations: | ||
- | Eyring, V., et al. (2013a), Long-term ozone changes and associated climate impacts in CMIP5 simulations, | ||
- | Eyring, V., et al. (2013b), Overview of IGAC/SPARC Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI) Community Simulations in Support of Upcoming Ozone and Climate Assessments, | ||
- | Ghan, S. J., X. Liu, R. C. Easter, R. Zaveri, P. J. Rasch, J.-H. Yoon, and B. Eaton (2012), Toward a minimal representation of aerosols in climate models: Comparative decomposition of aerosol direct, semi-direct and indirect radiative forcing, J. Climate, doi: 10.1175/ | ||
- | Gregory, J. M., W. J. Ingram, M. A. Palmer, G. S. Jones, P. A. Stott, R. B. Thorpe, J. A. Lowe, T. C. Johns, and K. D. Williams (2004), A new method for diagnosing radiative forcing and climate sensitivity, | ||
- | Kirtman, B., et al. (2013), Chapter 11. Near-term Climate Change: Projections and Predictability in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press Cambridge, United Kingdom. | ||
- | Myhre, G., et al. (2013), Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing, in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by T. F. Stocker, D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P. M. Midgley, pp. 659-740, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. | ||
- | Righi, M., V. Eyring, K.-D. Gottschaldt, | ||
- | Sherwood, S. C., S. Bony, and J. L. Dufresne (2014), Spread in model climate sensitivity traced to atmospheric convective mixing, Nature, 505(7481), 37-+. | ||
- | === Links === | + | [[http:// |
- | [[http:// | + | 1st Tri-MIP workshop in University of Reading, Reading, UK, 11-15 June 2018 |