SUMMARY ERA-40 is a re-analysis of meteorological observations from September 1957 to August 2002 produced by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) in collaboration with many institutions. The observing system changed considerably over this re-analysis period, with assimilable data provided by a succession of satellite-borne instruments from the 1970s onwards, supplemented by increasing numbers of observations from aircraft, ocean-buoys and other surface platforms, but with a declining number of radiosonde ascents since the late 1980s. The observations used in ERA-40 were accumulated from many sources. The first part of this paper describes the data acquisition and the principal changes in data type and coverage over the period. It also describes the data assimilation system used for ERA-40. This benefited from many of the changes introduced into operational forecasting since the mid-1990s, when the systems used for the 15-year ECMWF re-analysis (ERA-15) and the National Centers for Environmental Prediction/National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCEP/NCAR) re-analysis were implemented. Several of the improvements are discussed. General aspects of the production of the analyses are also summarized.A number of results indicative of the overall performance of the data assimilation system, and implicitly of the observing system, are presented and discussed. The comparison of background (short-range) forecasts and analyses with observations, the consistency of the global mass budget, the magnitude of differences between analysis and background fields and the accuracy of medium-range forecasts run from the ERA-40 analyses are illustrated. Several results demonstrate the marked improvement that was made to the observing system for the * Corresponding author: European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Shinfield Park, Reading RG2 9AX, UK. e-mail: adrian.simmons@ecmwf. southern hemisphere in the 1970s, particularly towards the end of the decade. In contrast, the synoptic quality of the analysis for the northern hemisphere is sufficient to provide forecasts that remain skilful well into the medium range for all years. Two particular problems are also examined: excessive precipitation over tropical oceans and a too strong Brewer-Dobson circulation, both of which are pronounced in later years. Several other aspects of the quality of the re-analyses revealed by monitoring and validation studies are summarized. Expectations that the 'second-generation' ERA-40 re-analysis would provide products that are better than those from the firstgeneration ERA-15 and NCEP/NCAR re-analyses are found to have been met in most cases.

No abstract

The most recent version of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology atmospheric general circulation model, ECHAM5, is used to study the impact of changes in horizontal and vertical resolution on seasonal mean climate. In a series of Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP)-style experiments with resolutions ranging between T21L19 and T159L31, the systematic errors and convergence properties are assessed for two vertical resolutions. At low vertical resolution (L19) there is no evidence for convergence to a more realistic climate state for horizontal resolutions higher than T42. At higher vertical resolution (L31), on the other hand, the root-mean-square errors decrease monotonically with increasing horizontal resolution. Furthermore, except for T42, the L31 versions are superior to their L19 counterparts, and the improvements become more evident at increasingly higher horizontal resolutions. This applies, in particular, to the zonal mean climate state and to the stationary wave patterns in boreal winter. As in previous studies, increasing horizontal resolution leads to a warming of the troposphere, most prominently at midlatitudes, and to a poleward shift and intensification of the midlatitude westerlies. Increasing the vertical resolution has the opposite effect, almost independent of horizontal resolution. Whereas the atmosphere is colder at low and middle latitudes, it is warmer at high latitudes and close to the surface. In addition, increased vertical resolution results in a pronounced warming in the polar upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, where the cold bias is reduced by up to 50% compared to L19 simulations. Consistent with these temperature changes is a decrease and equatorward shift of the midlatitude westerlies. The substantial benefits in refining both horizontal and vertical resolution give some support to scaling arguments deduced from quasigeostrophic theory implying that horizontal and vertical resolution ought to be chosen consistently.

Increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are expected to modify the global water cycle with significant consequences for terrestrial hydrology. We assess the impact of climate change on hydrological droughts in a multimodel experiment including seven global impact models (GIMs) driven by biascorrected climate from five global climate models under four representative concentration pathways (RCPs). Drought severity is defined as the fraction of land under drought conditions. Results show a likely increase in the global severity of hydrological drought at the end of the 21st century, with systematically greater increases for RCPs describing stronger radiative forcings. Under RCP8.5, droughts exceeding 40% of analyzed land area are projected by nearly half of the simulations. This increase in drought severity has a strong signal-to-noise ratio at the global scale, and Southern Europe, the Middle East, the Southeast United States, Chile, and South West Australia are identified as possible hotspots for future water security issues. The uncertainty due to GIMs is greater than that from global climate models, particularly if including a GIM that accounts for the dynamic response of plants to CO 2 and climate, as this model simulates little or no increase in drought frequency. Our study demonstrates that different representations of terrestrial water-cycle processes in GIMs are responsible for a much larger uncertainty in the response of hydrological drought to climate change than previously thought. When assessing the impact of climate change on hydrology, it is therefore critical to consider a diverse range of GIMs to better capture the uncertainty.climate impact | global hydrology | evaporation | global warming T he global water cycle is expected to change over the 21st century due to the combined effects of climate change and increasing human intervention. In a warmer world, the waterholding capacity of the atmosphere will increase, resulting in a change in the frequency of precipitation extremes, increased evaporation and dry periods (1), and intensification of droughts (2). This process is represented by most global climate models (GCMs) by increased summer dryness and winter wetness over large areas of continental mid to high latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere (3), associated with a reduction in water availability at continental (4, 5) and global scales (6, 7). Because such changes have potentially very serious implications in some regions of the world, identifying areas where there is agreement in the direction and magnitude of changes in drought characteristics (hotspots) in response to climate change is essential information for water resource management aimed at ensuring water security in a changing climate.Most GCMs, however, are not able to reproduce the fine-scale processes governing terrestrial hydrology (and hence runoff) and suffer from systematic biases (8). As land-atmospheric feedbacks are not yet fully understood and reproduced by global models (9), and because full coupling ...

No abstract

Six land surface models and five global hydrological models participate in a model intercomparison project [Water Model Intercomparison Project (WaterMIP)], which for the first time compares simulation results of these different classes of models in a consistent way. In this paper, the simulation setup is described and aspects of the multimodel global terrestrial water balance are presented. All models were run at 0.58 spatial resolution for the global land areas for a 15-yr period (1985-99) using a newly developed global meteorological dataset. Simulated global terrestrial evapotranspiration, excluding Greenland and Antarctica, ranges from 415 to 586 mm yr 21 (from 60 000 to 85 000 km 3 yr 21 ), and simulated runoff ranges from 290 to 457 mm yr 21 (from 42 000 to 66 000 km 3 yr 21 ). Both the mean and median runoff fractions for the land surface models are lower than those of the global hydrological models, although the range is wider. Significant simulation differences between land surface and global hydrological models are found to be caused by the snow scheme employed. The physically based energy balance approach used by land surface models generally results in lower snow water equivalent values than the conceptual degreeday approach used by global hydrological models. Some differences in simulated runoff and evapotranspiration are explained by model parameterizations, although the processes included and parameterizations used are not distinct to either land surface models or global hydrological models. The results show that differences between models are a major source of uncertainty. Climate change impact studies thus need to use not only multiple climate models but also some other measure of uncertainty (e.g., multiple impact models).

The analysis of possible regional climate changes over Europe as simulated by ten regional climate models within the context of PRUDENCE requires a careful investigation of possible systematic biases in the models. The purpose of this paper is to identify how the main model systematic biases vary across the different models.Two fundamental aspects of model validation are addressed here: the ability to simulate i) the longterm (30 or 40 years) mean climate and ii) the inter-annual variability. The analysis concentrates on near-surface air temperature and precipitation over land and focuses mainly on winter and summer.In general, there is a warm bias with respect to the CRU data set in these extreme seasons and a tendency to cold biases in the transition seasons. In winter the typical spread (standard deviation) between the models is 1K. During summer there is generally a better agreement between observed and simulated values of inter-annual variability although there is a relatively clear signal that the modeled temperature variability is larger than suggested by observations, while precipitation variability is closer to observations. The areas with warm (cold) bias in winter generally exhibit wet (dry) biases, whereas the relationship is the reverse during summer (though much less clear, coupling warm (cold) biases with dry (wet) ones). When comparing the RCMs with their driving GCM, they generally reproduce the large-scale circulation of the GCM though in some cases there are substantial differences between regional biases in surface temperature and precipitation.4

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.