Abstract. The second version of the coupled Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM2) is presented and evaluated. NorESM2 is based on the second version of the Community Earth System Model (CESM2) and shares with CESM2 the computer code infrastructure and many Earth system model components. However, NorESM2 employs entirely different ocean and ocean biogeochemistry models. The atmosphere component of NorESM2 (CAM-Nor) includes a different module for aerosol physics and chemistry, including interactions with cloud and radiation; additionally, CAM-Nor includes improvements in the formulation of local dry and moist energy conservation, in local and global angular momentum conservation, and in the computations for deep convection and air–sea fluxes. The surface components of NorESM2 have minor changes in the albedo calculations and to land and sea-ice models. We present results from simulations with NorESM2 that were carried out for the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). Two versions of the model are used: one with lower (∼ 2∘) atmosphere–land resolution and one with medium (∼ 1∘) atmosphere–land resolution. The stability of the pre-industrial climate and the sensitivity of the model to abrupt and gradual quadrupling of CO2 are assessed, along with the ability of the model to simulate the historical climate under the CMIP6 forcings. Compared to observations and reanalyses, NorESM2 represents an improvement over previous versions of NorESM in most aspects. NorESM2 appears less sensitive to greenhouse gas forcing than its predecessors, with an estimated equilibrium climate sensitivity of 2.5 K in both resolutions on a 150-year time frame; however, this estimate increases with the time window and the climate sensitivity at equilibration is much higher. We also consider the model response to future scenarios as defined by selected Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project defined under CMIP6. Under the four scenarios (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5), the warming in the period 2090–2099 compared to 1850–1879 reaches 1.3, 2.2, 3.0, and 3.9 K in NorESM2-LM, and 1.3, 2.1, 3.1, and 3.9 K in NorESM-MM, robustly similar in both resolutions. NorESM2-LM shows a rather satisfactory evolution of recent sea-ice area. In NorESM2-LM, an ice-free Arctic Ocean is only avoided in the SSP1-2.6 scenario.

The variance of a jet's position in latitude is found to be related to its average speed: when a jet becomes stronger, its variability in latitude decreases. This relationship is shown to hold for observed midlatitude jets around the world and also across a hierarchy of numerical models. North Atlantic jet variability is shown to be modulated on decadal time scales, with decades of a strong, steady jet being interspersed with decades of a weak, variable jet. These modulations are also related to variations in the basinwide occurrence of highimpact blocking events. A picture emerges of complex multidecadal jet variability in which recent decades do not appear unusual. An underlying barotropic mechanism is proposed to explain this behavior, related to the change in refractive properties of a jet as it strengthens, and the subsequent effect on the distribution of Rossby wave breaking.

The second version of the fully coupled Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM2) is presented and evaluated.NorESM2 is based on the second version of the Community Earth System Model (CESM2), but has entirely different ocean and ocean biogeochemistry models; a new module for aerosols in the atmosphere model along with aerosol-radiation-cloud interactions and changes related to the moist energy formulation, deep convection scheme and angular momentum conservation; modified albedo and air-sea turbulent flux calculations; and minor changes to land and sea ice models. We show results 5 from low (∼2 • ) and medium (∼1 • ) atmosphere-land resolution versions of NorESM2 that have both been used to carry out simulations for the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). The stability of the pre-industrial climate and the sensitivity of the model to abrupt and gradual quadrupling of CO 2 is assessed, along with the ability of the model to simulate the historical climate under the CMIP6 forcings. As compared to observations and reanalyses, NorESM2represents an improvement over previous versions of NorESM in most aspects. NorESM2 is less sensitive to greenhouse gas 10 forcing than its predecessors, with an equilibrium climate sensitivity of 2.5 K in both resolutions on a 150 year frame. We also consider the model response to future scenarios as defined by selected shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs) from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project defined under CMIP6. Under the four scenarios SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5, the warming in the period 2090-2099 compared to 1850-1879 reaches 1.3, 2.2, 3.0, and 3.9 K in NorESM2-LM, and 1.3, 2.1, 3.1, and 3.9 K in NorESM-MM, robustly similar in both resolutions. NorESM2-LM shows a rather satisfactorily 15 evolution of recent sea ice area. In NorESM2-LM an ice free Arctic Ocean is only avoided in the SSP1-2.6 scenario. 30 harmonizing the implementation of the aerosol scheme with the standard aerosol schemes in CESM. To extend the capabilities of NorESM as an Earth System Model, a strong focus has been put on the interactive description of natural emissions of aerosols and their precursors, and tightening the coupling between the different Earth System components. Finally, the ocean model (Bentsen et al., in prep.) and the ocean biogeochemistry module (Schwinger et al., 2016; Tjiputra et al., 2019) have been further developed. 35 This manuscript gives a description of NorESM2, and a basic evaluation against observations of the simulation of the atmosphere, sea ice, and ocean in a small set of baseline long-duration experiments with the new model. It focuses on such aspects as the simulated climatology, its stability and internal variability, and also on its response under historical and enhancedgreenhouse gas scenario forcings. Currently, NorESM2 exists in three versions. The two versions presented here are NorESM2-LM and NorESM2-MM: they 40 differ in the horizontal resolution of the atmosphere and land component (approximately 2 • for LM and 1 • i...

This article provides a reconciling perspective on the two main, but contradictory, interpretations of the southern annular mode (SAM). SAM was originally thought to characterize meridional shifts in the storm track across the entire hemisphere. This perspective was later questioned, and SAM was interpreted as a statistical artifact depending on the choice of base region for the principal component analysis. Neither perspective, however, fully describes SAM. We show that SAM cannot be interpreted in terms of midlatitude variability, as SAM merely modulates the most poleward part of the cyclone tracks and only marginally influences the distribution of other weather-related features of the storm track (e.g., position of jet axes and Rossby wave breaking). Instead, SAM emerges as the leading pattern of geopotential variability due to strong correlations of sea level pressure around the Antarctic continent. As SAM correlates strongly both with the pan-Antarctic mean temperature and the meridional heat flux through 65°S, we hypothesize that SAM can be interpreted as a measure of the degree of the (de)coupling between Antarctica and the southern midlatitudes. As an alternative way of characterizing southern midlatitude variability, we seek domains in which the leading EOF patterns of both the geopotential and storm-track features yield a dynamically consistent picture. This approach is successful for the South Pacific. Here the leading variability patterns are closely related to the Pacific–South America pattern and point toward an NAO-like variability.