[1] The new Max-Planck-Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM) is used in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5) in a series of climate change experiments for either idealized CO 2 -only forcing or forcings based on observations and the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios. The paper gives an overview of the model configurations, experiments related forcings, and initialization procedures and presents results for the simulated changes in climate and carbon cycle. It is found that the climate feedback depends on the global warming and possibly the forcing history. The global warming from climatological 1850 conditions to 2080-2100 ranges from 1.5 C under the RCP2.6 scenario to 4.4 C under the RCP8.5 scenario. Over this range, the patterns of temperature and precipitation change are nearly independent of the global warming. The model shows a tendency to reduce the ocean heat uptake efficiency toward a warmer climate, and hence acceleration in warming in the later years. The precipitation sensitivity can be as high as 2.5% K 21 if the CO 2 concentration is constant, or as small as 1.6% K 21, if the CO 2 concentration is increasing. The oceanic uptake of anthropogenic carbon increases over time in all scenarios, being smallest in the experiment forced by RCP2.6 and largest in that for RCP8.5. The land also serves as a net carbon sink in all scenarios, predominantly in boreal regions. The strong tropical carbon sources found in the RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 experiments are almost absent in the RCP4.5 experiment, which can be explained by reforestation in the RCP4.5 scenario.Citation: Giorgetta, M. A., et al. (2013), Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 5, 572-597,

[1] MPI-ESM is a new version of the global Earth system model developed at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology. This paper describes the ocean state and circulation as well as basic aspects of variability in simulations contributing to the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). The performance of the ocean/ sea-ice model MPIOM, coupled to a new version of the atmosphere model ECHAM6 and modules for land surface and ocean biogeochemistry, is assessed for two model versions with different grid resolution in the ocean. The low-resolution configuration has a nominal resolution of 1.5, whereas the higher resolution version features a quasiuniform, eddy-permitting global resolution of 0.4. The paper focuses on important oceanic features, such as surface temperature and salinity, water mass distribution, large-scale circulation, and heat and freshwater transports. In general, these integral quantities are simulated well in comparison with observational estimates, and improvements in comparison with the predecessor system are documented; for example, for tropical variability and sea ice representation. Introducing an eddy-permitting grid configuration in the ocean leads to improvements, in particular, in the representation of interior water mass properties in the Atlantic and in the representation of important ocean currents, such as the Agulhas and Equatorial current systems. In general, however, there are more similarities than differences between the two grid configurations, and several shortcomings, known from earlier versions of the coupled model, prevail.

A new release of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI‐ESM1.2) is presented. The development focused on correcting errors in and improving the physical processes representation, as well as improving the computational performance, versatility, and overall user friendliness. In addition to new radiation and aerosol parameterizations of the atmosphere, several relatively large, but partly compensating, coding errors in the model's cloud, convection, and turbulence parameterizations were corrected. The representation of land processes was refined by introducing a multilayer soil hydrology scheme, extending the land biogeochemistry to include the nitrogen cycle, replacing the soil and litter decomposition model and improving the representation of wildfires. The ocean biogeochemistry now represents cyanobacteria prognostically in order to capture the response of nitrogen fixation to changing climate conditions and further includes improved detritus settling and numerous other refinements. As something new, in addition to limiting drift and minimizing certain biases, the instrumental record warming was explicitly taken into account during the tuning process. To this end, a very high climate sensitivity of around 7 K caused by low‐level clouds in the tropics as found in an intermediate model version was addressed, as it was not deemed possible to match observed warming otherwise. As a result, the model has a climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 over preindustrial conditions of 2.77 K, maintaining the previously identified highly nonlinear global mean response to increasing CO2 forcing, which nonetheless can be represented by a simple two‐layer model.

International audienc

[1] During a development stage global climate models have their properties adjusted or tuned in various ways to best match the known state of the Earth's climate system. These desired properties are observables, such as the radiation balance at the top of the atmosphere, the global mean temperature, sea ice, clouds and wind fields. The tuning is typically performed by adjusting uncertain, or even non-observable, parameters related to processes not explicitly represented at the model grid resolution. The practice of climate model tuning has seen an increasing level of attention because key model properties, such as climate sensitivity, have been shown to depend on frequently used tuning parameters. Here we provide insights into how climate model tuning is practically done in the case of closing the radiation balance and adjusting the global mean temperature for the Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM). We demonstrate that considerable ambiguity exists in the choice of parameters, and present and compare three alternatively tuned, yet plausible configurations of the climate model. The impacts of parameter tuning on climate sensitivity was less than anticipated.