No abstract

Eleven coupled climate-carbon cycle models used a common protocol to study the coupling between climate change and the carbon cycle. The models were forced by historical emissions and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) A2 anthropogenic emissions of CO 2 for the 1850-2100 time period. For each model, two simulations were performed in order to isolate the impact of climate change on the land and ocean carbon cycle, and therefore the climate feedback on the atmospheric CO 2 concentration growth rate. There was unanimous agreement among the models that future climate change will reduce the efficiency of the earth system to absorb the anthropogenic carbon perturbation. A larger fraction of anthropogenic CO 2 will stay airborne if climate change is accounted for. By the end of the twenty-first century, this additional CO 2 varied between 20 and 200 ppm for the two extreme models, the majority of the models lying between 50 and 100 ppm. The higher CO 2 levels led to an additional climate warming ranging between 0.1°and 1.5°C.All models simulated a negative sensitivity for both the land and the ocean carbon cycle to future climate. However, there was still a large uncertainty on the magnitude of these sensitivities. Eight models attributed most of the changes to the land, while three attributed it to the ocean. Also, a majority of the models located the reduction of land carbon uptake in the Tropics. However, the attribution of the land sensitivity to changes in net primary productivity versus changes in respiration is still subject to debate; no consensus emerged among the models.

While internal climate variability is known to affect climate projections, its influence is often underappreciated and confused with model error. Why? In general, modeling centers contribute a small number of realizations to international climate model assessments [e.g., phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5)]. As a result, model error and internal climate variability are difficult, and at times impossible, to disentangle. In response, the Community Earth System Model (CESM) community designed the CESM Large Ensemble (CESM-LE) with the explicit goal of enabling assessment of climate change in the presence of internal climate variability. All CESM-LE simulations use a single CMIP5 model (CESM with the Community Atmosphere Model, version 5). The core simulations replay the twenty to twenty-first century (1920–2100) 30 times under historical and representative concentration pathway 8.5 external forcing with small initial condition differences. Two companion 1000+-yr-long preindustrial control simulations (fully coupled, prognostic atmosphere and land only) allow assessment of internal climate variability in the absence of climate change. Comprehensive outputs, including many daily fields, are available as single-variable time series on the Earth System Grid for anyone to use. Early results demonstrate the substantial influence of internal climate variability on twentieth- to twenty-first-century climate trajectories. Global warming hiatus decades occur, similar to those recently observed. Internal climate variability alone can produce projection spread comparable to that in CMIP5. Scientists and stakeholders can use CESM-LE outputs to help interpret the observational record, to understand projection spread and to plan for a range of possible futures influenced by both internal climate variability and forced climate change.

A global three‐dimensional marine ecosystem model with several key phytoplankton functional groups, multiple limiting nutrients, explicit iron cycling, and a mineral ballast/organic matter parameterization is run within a global ocean circulation model. The coupled biogeochemistry/ecosystem/circulation (BEC) model reproduces known basin‐scale patterns of primary and export production, biogenic silica production, calcification, chlorophyll, macronutrient and dissolved iron concentrations. The model captures observed high nitrate, low chlorophyll (HNLC) conditions in the Southern Ocean, subarctic and equatorial Pacific. Spatial distributions of nitrogen fixation are in general agreement with field data, with total N‐fixation of 55 Tg N. Diazotrophs directly account for a small fraction of primary production (0.5%) but indirectly support 10% of primary production and 8% of sinking particulate organic carbon (POC) export. Diatoms disproportionately contribute to export of POC out of surface waters, but CaCO3 from the coccolithophores is the key driver of POC flux to the deep ocean in the model. An iron source from shallow ocean sediments is found critical in preventing iron limitation in shelf regions, most notably in the Arctic Ocean, but has a relatively localized impact. In contrast, global‐scale primary production, export production, and nitrogen fixation are all sensitive to variations in atmospheric mineral dust inputs. The residence time for dissolved iron in the upper ocean is estimated to be a few years to a decade. Most of the iron utilized by phytoplankton is from subsurface sources supplied by mixing, entrainment, and ocean circulation. However, owing to the short residence time of iron in the upper ocean, this subsurface iron pool is critically dependent on continual replenishment from atmospheric dust deposition and, to a lesser extent, lateral transport from shelf regions.

No abstract

No abstract

An overview of the Community Earth System Model Version 2 (CESM2) is provided, including a discussion of the challenges encountered during its development and how they were addressed. In addition, an evaluation of a pair of CESM2 long preindustrial control and historical ensemble simulations is presented. These simulations were performed using the nominal 1° horizontal resolution configuration of the coupled model with both the “low‐top” (40 km, with limited chemistry) and “high‐top” (130 km, with comprehensive chemistry) versions of the atmospheric component. CESM2 contains many substantial science and infrastructure improvements and new capabilities since its previous major release, CESM1, resulting in improved historical simulations in comparison to CESM1 and available observations. These include major reductions in low‐latitude precipitation and shortwave cloud forcing biases; better representation of the Madden‐Julian Oscillation; better El Niño‐Southern Oscillation‐related teleconnections; and a global land carbon accumulation trend that agrees well with observationally based estimates. Most tropospheric and surface features of the low‐ and high‐top simulations are very similar to each other, so these improvements are present in both configurations. CESM2 has an equilibrium climate sensitivity of 5.1–5.3 °C, larger than in CESM1, primarily due to a combination of relatively small changes to cloud microphysics and boundary layer parameters. In contrast, CESM2's transient climate response of 1.9–2.0 °C is comparable to that of CESM1. The model outputs from these and many other simulations are available to the research community, and they represent CESM2's contributions to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6.

The magnitude and evolution of parameters that characterize feedbacks in the coupled carbon-climate system are compared across nine Earth system models (ESMs). The analysis is based on results from biogeochemically, radiatively, and fully coupled simulations in which CO 2 increases at a rate of 1% yr 21 . These simulations are part of phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). The CO 2 fluxes between the atmosphere and underlying land and ocean respond to changes in atmospheric CO 2 concentration and to changes in temperature and other climate variables. The carbon-concentration and carbonclimate feedback parameters characterize the response of the CO 2 flux between the atmosphere and the underlying surface to these changes. Feedback parameters are calculated using two different approaches. The two approaches are equivalent and either may be used to calculate the contribution of the feedback terms to diagnosed cumulative emissions. The contribution of carbon-concentration feedback to diagnosed cumulative emissions that are consistent with the 1% increasing CO 2 concentration scenario is about 4.5 times larger than the carbon-climate feedback. Differences in the modeled responses of the carbon budget to changes in CO 2 and temperature are seen to be 3-4 times larger for the land components compared to the ocean components of participating models. The feedback parameters depend on the state of the system as well the forcing scenario but nevertheless provide insight into the behavior of the coupled carbon-climate system and a useful common framework for comparing models.