Simulation of the modern climate using the INM-CM48 climate model

Володин, Е. М.; Mortikov, Evgeny; Kostrykin, S. V.; Galin, V. Ya.; Lykossov, V. N.; Gritsun, Andrey; Diansky, N. A.; Гусев, А. В.; Iakovlev, Nikolay; Шестакова, А. А.; Емелина, С. В.

doi:10.1515/rnam-2018-0032

Cited by 170 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A concise description of the application of the Community Earth System Models (COSMOS) for paleoclimate studies is given by Stepanek and Lohmann (2012). The COSMOS version used here has proven to be a suitable tool for the study of the Earth's past climate, from the Holocene Lohmann et al, 2013) and previous interglacials (Pfeiffer and Lohmann, 2016;Gierz et al, 2017) to glacial (Gong et al, 2013;Zhang et al, 2013Zhang et al, , 2014Abelmann et al, 2015;Zhang et al, 2017) and tectonic timescales (Knorr et al, 2011;Knorr and Lohmann, 2014;Walliser et al, 2016;Huang et al, 2017;Niezgodzki et al, 2017;Stärz et al, 2017;Walliser et al, 2017;Vahlenkamp et al, 2018;Niezgodzki et al, 2019). The standard model code of the COSMOS version COSMOS-landveg r2413 ( 2009) is available upon request from the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg (https://www.mpimet.mpg.de, last access: 10 January 2021).…”

Section: Cosmos Model Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The INMCM simulations are carried out with the INM-CM48 (INM-CM4-8) version of the model, as described in Volodin et al (2018). The INM-CM4-8 climate model has a horizontal resolution of 2 • × 1.5 • in the atmosphere; a total of 17 vertical sigma levels up to a value of 0.01 (about 30 km) are used for the Eocene experiment, and 21 levels are used for the preindustrial experiment.…”

Section: Inmcm (Inm-cm4-8) Inmcm Model Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

DeepMIP: model intercomparison of early Eocene climatic optimum (EECO) large-scale climate features and comparison with proxy data

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We present results from an ensemble of eight climate models, each of which has carried out simulations of the early Eocene climate optimum (EECO, ∼ 50 million years ago). These simulations have been carried out in the framework of the Deep-Time Model Intercomparison Project (DeepMIP; http://www.deepmip.org, last access: 10 January 2021); thus, all models have been configured with the same paleogeographic and vegetation boundary conditions. The results indicate that these non-CO2 boundary conditions contribute between 3 and 5 ∘C to Eocene warmth. Compared with results from previous studies, the DeepMIP simulations generally show a reduced spread of the global mean surface temperature response across the ensemble for a given atmospheric CO2 concentration as well as an increased climate sensitivity on average. An energy balance analysis of the model ensemble indicates that global mean warming in the Eocene compared with the preindustrial period mostly arises from decreases in emissivity due to the elevated CO2 concentration (and associated water vapour and long-wave cloud feedbacks), whereas the reduction in the Eocene in terms of the meridional temperature gradient is primarily due to emissivity and albedo changes owing to the non-CO2 boundary conditions (i.e. the removal of the Antarctic ice sheet and changes in vegetation). Three of the models (the Community Earth System Model, CESM; the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, GFDL, model; and the Norwegian Earth System Model, NorESM) show results that are consistent with the proxies in terms of the global mean temperature, meridional SST gradient, and CO2, without prescribing changes to model parameters. In addition, many of the models agree well with the first-order spatial patterns in the SST proxies. However, at a more regional scale, the models lack skill. In particular, the modelled anomalies are substantially lower than those indicated by the proxies in the southwest Pacific; here, modelled continental surface air temperature anomalies are more consistent with surface air temperature proxies, implying a possible inconsistency between marine and terrestrial temperatures in either the proxies or models in this region. Our aim is that the documentation of the large-scale features and model–data comparison presented herein will pave the way to further studies that explore aspects of the model simulations in more detail, for example the ocean circulation, hydrological cycle, and modes of variability, and encourage sensitivity studies to aspects such as paleogeography, orbital configuration, and aerosols.

show abstract

Section: Cosmos Model Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Inmcm (Inm-cm4-8) Inmcm Model Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

DeepMIP: model intercomparison of early Eocene climatic optimum (EECO) large-scale climate features and comparison with proxy data

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Cosmos Model Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

DeepMIP: Model intercomparison of early Eocene climatic optimum (EECO) large-scale climate features and comparison with proxy data

Lunt¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<div> <div> <div>We present results from an ensemble of eight climate models, each of which has carried out simulations of theearly Eocene climate optimum (EECO, &#8764;50 million years ago). These simulations have been carried out in the framework of DeepMIP (www.deepmip.org), and as such all models have been configured with the same paleogeographic and vegetation boundary conditions. The results indicate that these non-CO<sub>2</sub> boundary conditions contribute between 3 and 5<sup>o</sup>C to Eocene warmth. Compared to results from previous studies, the DeepMIP simulations show in general reduced spread of global mean surface temperature response across the ensemble for a given atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> concentration, and an increased climate sensitivity on average. An energy balance analysis of the model ensemble indicates that global mean warming in the Eocene compared with preindustrial arises mostly from decreases in emissivity due to the elevated CO<sub>2</sub> (and associated water vapour and long-wave cloud feedbacks), whereas in terms of the meridional temperature gradient, the reduction in the Eocene is primarily due to emissivity and albedo changes due to the non-CO<sub>2</sub> boundary conditions (i.e. removal of the Antarctic ice sheet and changes in vegetation). Three of the models (CESM, GFDL, and NorESM) show results that are consistent with the proxies in terms of global mean temperature, meridional SST gradient, and CO<sub>2</sub>, without prescribing changes to model parameters. In addition, many of the models agree well with the first-order spatial patterns in the SST proxies. However, at a more regional scale the models lack skill. In particular, in the southwest Pacific, the modelled anomalies are substantially less than indicated by the proxies; here, modelled continental surface air temperature anomalies are more consistent with surface air temperature proxies, implying a possible inconsistency between marine and terrestrial temperatures in either the proxiesor models in this region. Our aim is that the documentation of the large scale features and model-data comparison presented herein will pave the way to further studies that explore aspects of the model simulations in more detail, for example the ocean circulation, hydrological cycle, and modes of variability; and encourage sensitivity studies to aspects such as paleogeography, orbital configuration, and aerosols</div> </div> </div>

show abstract

“…Ensemble-averaged Last Interglacial change in monsoon-related rainfall rate (in mm d −1 ). Red and blue contours show the boundaries of lig127k and piControl monsoon domains, respectively, using the definitions ofWang et al (2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Large-scale features of Last Interglacial climate: results from evaluating the <i>lig127k</i> simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6)–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The modeling of paleoclimate, using physically based tools, is increasingly seen as a strong out-of-sample test of the models that are used for the projection of future climate changes. New to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) is the Tier 1 Last Interglacial experiment for 127 000 years ago (lig127k), designed to address the climate responses to stronger orbital forcing than the midHolocene experiment, using the same state-of-the-art models as for the future and following a common experimental protocol. Here we present a first analysis of a multi-model ensemble of 17 climate models, all of which have completed the CMIP6 DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima) experiments. The equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) of these models varies from 1.8 to 5.6 ∘C. The seasonal character of the insolation anomalies results in strong summer warming over the Northern Hemisphere continents in the lig127k ensemble as compared to the CMIP6 piControl and much-reduced minimum sea ice in the Arctic. The multi-model results indicate enhanced summer monsoonal precipitation in the Northern Hemisphere and reductions in the Southern Hemisphere. These responses are greater in the lig127k than the CMIP6 midHolocene simulations as expected from the larger insolation anomalies at 127 than 6 ka. New synthesis for surface temperature and precipitation, targeted for 127 ka, have been developed for comparison to the multi-model ensemble. The lig127k model ensemble and data reconstructions are in good agreement for summer temperature anomalies over Canada, Scandinavia, and the North Atlantic and for precipitation over the Northern Hemisphere continents. The model–data comparisons and mismatches point to further study of the sensitivity of the simulations to uncertainties in the boundary conditions and of the uncertainties and sparse coverage in current proxy reconstructions. The CMIP6–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4) lig127k simulations, in combination with the proxy record, improve our confidence in future projections of monsoons, surface temperature, and Arctic sea ice, thus providing a key target for model evaluation and optimization.

show abstract

Simulation of the modern climate using the INM-CM48 climate model

Cited by 170 publications

References 1 publication

DeepMIP: model intercomparison of early Eocene climatic optimum (EECO) large-scale climate features and comparison with proxy data

DeepMIP: model intercomparison of early Eocene climatic optimum (EECO) large-scale climate features and comparison with proxy data

DeepMIP: Model intercomparison of early Eocene climatic optimum (EECO) large-scale climate features and comparison with proxy data

Large-scale features of Last Interglacial climate: results from evaluating the <i>lig127k</i> simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6)–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Simulation of the modern climate using the INM-CM48 climate model

Cited by 170 publications

References 1 publication

DeepMIP: model intercomparison of early Eocene climatic optimum (EECO) large-scale climate features and comparison with proxy data

DeepMIP: model intercomparison of early Eocene climatic optimum (EECO) large-scale climate features and comparison with proxy data

DeepMIP: Model intercomparison of early Eocene climatic optimum (EECO) large-scale climate features and comparison with proxy data

Large-scale features of Last Interglacial climate: results from evaluating the &lt;i&gt;lig127k&lt;/i&gt; simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6)–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Large-scale features of Last Interglacial climate: results from evaluating the <i>lig127k</i> simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6)–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4)