Abstract. Understanding natural and anthropogenic climate change processes involves using computational models that represent the main components of the Earth system: the atmosphere, ocean, sea ice, and land surface. These models have become increasingly computationally expensive as resolution is increased and more complex process representations are included. However, to gain robust insight into how climate may respond to a given forcing, and to meaningfully quantify the associated uncertainty, it is often required to use either or both ensemble approaches and very long integrations. For this reason, more computationally efficient models can be very valuable tools. Here we provide a comprehensive overview of the suite of climate models based around the HadCM3 coupled general circulation model. This model was developed at the UK Met Office and has been heavily used during the last 15 years for a range of future (and past) climate change studies, but has now been largely superseded for many scientific studies by more recently developed models. However, it continues to be extensively used by various institutions, including the BRIDGE (Bristol Research Initiative for the Dynamic Global Environment) research group at the University of Bristol, who have made modest adaptations to the base HadCM3 model over time. These adaptations mean that the original documentation is not entirely representative, and several other relatively undocumented configurations are in use. We therefore describe the key features of a number of configurations of the HadCM3 climate model family, which together make up HadCM3@Bristol version 1.0. In order to differentiate variants that have undergone development at BRIDGE, we have introduced the letter B into the model nomenclature. We include descriptions of the atmosphere-only model (HadAM3B), the coupled model with a low-resolution ocean (HadCM3BL), the high-resolution atmosphere-only model (HadAM3BH), and the regional model (HadRM3B). These also include three versions of the land surface scheme. By comparing withPublished by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. observational datasets, we show that these models produce a good representation of many aspects of the climate system, including the land and sea surface temperatures, precipitation, ocean circulation, and vegetation. This evaluation, combined with the relatively fast computational speed (up to 1000 times faster than some CMIP6 models), motivates continued development and scientific use of the HadCM3B family of coupled climate models, predominantly for quantifying uncertainty and for long multi-millennial-scale simulations.

International audienc

The polar regions have been attracting more and more attention in recent years, fueled by the perceptible impacts of anthropogenic climate change. Polar climate change provides new opportunities, such as shorter shipping routes between Europe and East Asia, but also new risks such as the potential for industrial accidents or emergencies in ice-covered seas. Here, it is argued that environmental prediction systems for the polar regions are less developed than elsewhere. There are many reasons for this situation, including the polar regions being (historically) lower priority, with fewer in situ observations, and with numerous local physical processes that are less well represented by models. By contrasting the relative importance of different physical processes in polar and lower latitudes, the need for a dedicated polar prediction effort is illustrated. Research priorities are identified that will help to advance environmental polar prediction capabilities. Examples include an improvement of the polar observing system; the use of coupled atmosphere–sea ice–ocean models, even for short-term prediction; and insight into polar–lower-latitude linkages and their role for forecasting. Given the enormity of some of the challenges ahead, in a harsh and remote environment such as the polar regions, it is argued that rapid progress will only be possible with a coordinated international effort. More specifically, it is proposed to hold a Year of Polar Prediction (YOPP) from mid-2017 to mid-2019 in which the international research and operational forecasting communites will work together with stakeholders in a period of intensive observing, modeling, prediction, verification, user engagement, and educational activities.

Seasonal-to-interannual predictions of Arctic sea ice may be important for Arctic communities and industries alike. Previous studies have suggested that Arctic sea ice is potentially predictable but that the skill of predictions of the September extent minimum, initialized in early summer, may be low. The authors demonstrate that a melt season “predictability barrier” and two predictability reemergence mechanisms, suggested by a previous study, are robust features of five global climate models. Analysis of idealized predictions with one of these models [Hadley Centre Global Environment Model, version 1.2 (HadGEM1.2)], initialized in January, May and July, demonstrates that this predictability barrier exists in initialized forecasts as well. As a result, the skill of sea ice extent and volume forecasts are strongly start date dependent and those that are initialized in May lose skill much faster than those initialized in January or July. Thus, in an operational setting, initializing predictions of extent and volume in July has strong advantages for the prediction of the September minimum when compared to predictions initialized in May. Furthermore, a regional analysis of sea ice predictability indicates that extent is predictable for longer in the seasonal ice zones of the North Atlantic and North Pacific than in the regions dominated by perennial ice in the central Arctic and marginal seas. In a number of the Eurasian shelf seas, which are important for Arctic shipping, only the forecasts initialized in July have continuous skill during the first summer. In contrast, predictability of ice volume persists for over 2 yr in the central Arctic but less in other regions.

We establish the first intermodel comparison of seasonal to interannual predictability of present-day Arctic climate by performing coordinated sets of idealized ensemble predictions with four state-of-the-art global climate models. For Arctic sea ice extent and volume, there is potential predictive skill for lead times of up to 3 years, and potential prediction errors have similar growth rates and magnitudes across the models. Spatial patterns of potential prediction errors differ substantially between the models, but some features are robust. Sea ice concentration errors are largest in the marginal ice zone, and in winter they are almost zero away from the ice edge. Sea ice thickness errors are amplified along the coasts of the Arctic Ocean, an effect that is dominated by sea ice advection. These results give an upper bound on the ability of current global climate models to predict important aspects of Arctic climate.