Abstract. This study assesses the change in anthropogenic aerosol forcing from the mid-1970s to the mid-2000s. Both decades had similar global-mean anthropogenic aerosol optical depths but substantially different global distributions. For both years, we quantify (i) the forcing spread due to model-internal variability and (ii) the forcing spread among models. Our assessment is based on new ensembles of atmosphere-only simulations with five state-of-the-art Earth system models. Four of these models will be used in the sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6; Eyring et al., 2016). Here, the complexity of the anthropogenic aerosol has been reduced in the participating models. In all our simulations, we prescribe the same patterns of the anthropogenic aerosol optical properties and associated effects on the cloud droplet number concentration. We calculate the instantaneous radiative forcing (RF) and the effective radiative forcing (ERF). Their difference defines the net contribution from rapid adjustments. Our simulations show a model spread in ERF from −0.4 to −0.9 W m−2. The standard deviation in annual ERF is 0.3 W m−2, based on 180 individual estimates from each participating model. This result implies that identifying the model spread in ERF due to systematic differences requires averaging over a sufficiently large number of years. Moreover, we find almost identical ERFs for the mid-1970s and mid-2000s for individual models, although there are major model differences in natural aerosols and clouds. The model-ensemble mean ERF is −0.54 W m−2 for the pre-industrial era to the mid-1970s and −0.59 W m−2 for the pre-industrial era to the mid-2000s. Our result suggests that comparing ERF changes between two observable periods rather than absolute magnitudes relative to a poorly constrained pre-industrial state might provide a better test for a model's ability to represent transient climate changes.

The subseasonal-to-seasonal (S2S) predictive timescale, encompassing lead times ranging from 2 weeks to a season, is at the frontier of forecasting science. Forecasts on this timescale provide opportunities for enhanced application-focused capabilities to complement existing weather and climate services and products. There is, however, a ‘knowledge-value’ gap, where a lack of evidence and awareness of the potential socio-economic benefits of S2S forecasts limits their wider uptake. To address this gap, here we present the first global community effort at summarizing relevant applications of S2S forecasts to guide further decision-making and support the continued development of S2S forecasts and related services. Focusing on 12 sectoral case studies spanning public health, agriculture, water resource management, renewable energy and utilities, and emergency management and response, we draw on recent advancements to explore their application and utility. These case studies mark a significant step forward in moving from potential to actual S2S forecasting applications. We show that by placing user needs at the forefront of S2S forecast development – demonstrating both skill and utility across sectors – this dialogue can be used to help promote and accelerate the awareness, value and co-generation of S2S forecasts. We also highlight that while S2S forecasts are increasingly gaining interest among users, incorporating probabilistic S2S forecasts into existing decision-making operations is not trivial. Nevertheless, S2S forecasting represents a significant opportunity to generate useful, usable and actionable forecast applications for and with users that will increasingly unlock the potential of this forecasting timescale.

Abstract. Ice nucleating particles (INPs) increase the temperature at which supercooled droplets start to freeze. They are therefore of particular interest in mixed-phase cloud temperature regimes, where supercooled liquid droplets can persist for extended periods of time in the absence of INPs. When INPs are introduced to such an environment, the cloud can quickly glaciate following ice multiplication processes and the Wegener–Bergeron–Findeisen (WBF) process. The WBF process can also cause the ice to grow to precipitation size and precipitate out. All of these processes alter the radiative properties. Despite their potential influence on climate, the ice nucleation ability and importance of different aerosol species is still not well understood and is a field of active research. In this study, we use the aerosol–climate model ECHAM6-HAM2 to examine the global relevance of marine organic aerosol (MOA), which has drawn much interest in recent years as a potentially important INPs in remote marine regions. We address the uncertainties in emissions and ice nucleation activity of MOA with a range of reasonable set-ups and find a wide range of resulting MOA burdens. The relative importance of MOA as an INP compared to dust is investigated and found to depend strongly on the type of ice nucleation parameterisation scheme chosen. On the zonal mean, freezing due to MOA leads to relative increases in the cloud ice occurrence and in-cloud number concentration close to the surface in the polar regions during summer. Slight but consistent decreases in the in-cloud ice crystal effective radius can also be observed over the same regions during all seasons. Regardless, MOA was not found to affect the radiative balance significantly on the global scale, due to its relatively weak ice activity and a low sensitivity of cloud ice properties to heterogeneous ice nucleation in our model.

Abstract. Future sea ice retreat in the Arctic in summer and autumn is expected to affect both natural and anthropogenic aerosol emissions: sea ice acts as a barrier between the ocean and the atmosphere, and reducing it increases dimethyl sulfide and sea salt emissions. Additionally, a decrease in the area and thickness of sea ice could lead to enhanced Arctic ship traffic, for example due to shorter routes of cargo ships. Changes in the emissions of aerosol particles can then influence cloud properties, precipitation, surface albedo, and radiation. Next to changes in aerosol emissions, clouds will also be affected by increases in Arctic temperatures and humidities. In this study, we quantify how future aerosol radiative forcings and cloud radiative effects might change in the Arctic in late summer (July–August) and early autumn (September–October). Simulations were conducted for the years 2004 and 2050 with the global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6-HAM2. For 2050, simulations with and without additional ship emissions in the Arctic were carried out to quantify the impact of these emissions on the Arctic climate. In the future, sea salt as well as dimethyl sulfide emissions and burdens will increase in the Arctic. The increase in cloud condensation nuclei, which is due to changes in aerosol particles and meteorology, will enhance cloud droplet number concentrations over the Arctic Ocean (+10 % in late summer and +29 % in early autumn; in-cloud values averaged between 75 and 90∘ N). Furthermore, both liquid and total water path will increase (+10 % and +8 % in late summer; +34 % and +26 % in early autumn) since the specific humidity will be enhanced due to higher temperatures and the exposure of the ocean's surface. Changes in both aerosol radiative forcings and cloud radiative effects at the top of the atmosphere will not be dominated by the aerosol particles and clouds themselves but by the decrease in surface albedo (and by the increase in surface temperature for the longwave cloud radiative effect in early autumn). Mainly due to the reduction in sea ice, the aerosol radiative forcing will become less positive (decreasing from 0.53 to 0.36 W m−2 in late summer and from 0.15 to 0.11 W m−2 in early autumn). The decrease in sea ice is also mainly responsible for changes in the net cloud radiative effect, which will become more negative in late summer (changing from −36 to −46 W m−2). Therefore, the cooling component of both aerosols and clouds will gain importance in the future. We found that future Arctic ship emissions related to transport and oil and gas extraction (Peters et al., 2011) will not have a large impact on clouds and radiation: changes in aerosols only become significant when we increase these ship emissions by a factor of 10. However, even with 10-fold ship emissions, the net aerosol radiative forcing shows no significant changes. Enhanced black carbon deposition on snow leads to a locally significant but very small increase in radiative forcing over the central Arctic Ocean in early autumn (no significant increase for average between 75 and 90∘ N). Furthermore, the 10-fold higher ship emissions increase the optical thickness and lifetime of clouds in late summer (net cloud radiative effect changing from −48 to −52 W m−2). These aerosol–cloud effects have a considerably larger influence on the radiative forcing than the direct effects of particles (both aerosol particles in the atmosphere and particles deposited on snow). In summary, future ship emissions of aerosols and their precursor gases might have a net cooling effect, which is small compared to other changes in future Arctic climate such as those caused by the decrease in surface albedo.

Abstract. Future sea ice retreat in the Arctic in summer and autumn is expected to affect both natural and anthropogenic aerosol emissions: sea ice acts as a barrier between the ocean and the atmosphere, and reducing it increases dimethyl sulphide and sea salt emissions. A decrease in the area and thickness of sea ice could in addition lead to enhanced Arctic ship traffic, e.g. to shorten the paths of cargo ships. Changes in the emissions of aerosol particles can then influence cloud properties, precipitation, surface albedo, and radiation. Next to changes in aerosol particles, clouds will also be affected by increases in 5 Arctic temperatures and humidities. In this study, we quantified how future aerosol radiative forcing, aerosol-cloud interactions, and cloud radiative effects might change in the Arctic in late summer (July/August) and early autumn (September/October).Simulations were conducted for the years 2004 and 2050 with the global aerosol-climate model ECHAM6-HAM2. In 2050, simulations with and without additional ship emissions in the Arctic were carried out to quantify the impact of these emissions on the Arctic climate. 10We found that aerosol number concentrations in the Arctic will generally increase in the future due to enhanced emissions of sea salt as well as dimethyl sulphide. The increase in cloud condensation nuclei will enhance cloud droplet number concentrations over the Arctic Ocean. Furthermore, both liquid and total water content will increase since the specific humidity will be enhanced due to higher temperatures and the exposure of the ocean's surface.Changes in both aerosol radiative forcings and cloud radiative effects at the top of the atmosphere will not be dominated by 15 the aerosol particles and clouds themselves but by the decrease in surface albedo (and by the increase in surface temperature for the longwave cloud radiative effect). Due to the reduction in sea ice, the aerosol radiative forcing will become less positive and the cloud radiative effect more negative, i.e. the cooling component of both will gain importance in the future.We found that future Arctic ship emissions related to transport and oil/gas extraction (Peters et al., 2011, ACP) will not have a large impact on clouds and radiation: changes in aerosol concentrations only become significant when we increase 20 these ship emissions by a factor of ten. The net aerosol radiative forcing shows only small, non-significant changes. Enhanced black carbon deposition on snow leads to a significant but very small warming over the central Arctic Ocean in early autumn.Furthermore, the tenfold higher ship emissions increase the optical thickness of low clouds and thus induce a small Twomey effect (cooling) in late summer. This Twomey effect has a considerably larger influence on temperature than the direct effect of particles (both aerosol particles in the atmosphere and particles deposited on snow), but it is more uncertain because of the 25 1 Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi