Simulations for CMIP6 With the AWI Climate Model AWI‐CM‐1‐1

Abstract

The Alfred Wegener Institute Climate Model (AWI‐CM) participates for the first time in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), CMIP6. The sea ice‐ocean component, FESOM, runs on an unstructured mesh with horizontal resolutions ranging from 8 to 80 km. FESOM is coupled to the Max Planck Institute atmospheric model ECHAM 6.3 at a horizontal resolution of about 100 km. Using objective performance indices, it is shown that AWI‐CM performs better than the average of CMIP5 models. AWI‐CM shows an equilibrium climate sensitivity of 3.2°C, which is similar to the CMIP5 average, and a transient climate response of 2.1°C which is slightly higher than the CMIP5 average. The negative trend of Arctic sea‐ice extent in September over the past 30 years is 20–30% weaker in our simulations compared to observations. With the strongest emission scenario, the AMOC decreases by 25% until the end of the century which is less than the CMIP5 average of 40%. Patterns and even magnitude of simulated temperature and precipitation changes at the end of this century compared to present‐day climate under the strong emission scenario SSP585 are similar to the multi‐model CMIP5 mean. The simulations show a 11°C warming north of the Barents Sea and around 2°C to 3°C over most parts of the ocean as well as a wetting of the Arctic, subpolar, tropical, and Southern Ocean. Furthermore, in the northern middle latitudes in boreal summer and autumn as well as in the southern middle latitudes, a more zonal atmospheric flow is projected throughout the year.

Global Observations and CMIP6 Simulations of Compound Extremes of Monthly Temperature and Precipitation

“…As in previous studies (Diaconescu et al., 2015; Kim et al., 2020; Semmler et al., 2020), prior to the analysis, the observational data and all CMIP6 output were re‐gridded to the same spatial resolution (1° × 1°), using bilinear interpolation. Only one realization from each model is used here so that the performance of each model can be compared on an equal basis.…”

Evaluating stratospheric ozone and water vapour changes in CMIP6 models from 1850 to 2100

“…Future emissions of CH 4 and N 2 O, which are not regulated in the same way as halogenated ODSs, are associated with greater uncertainty and future concentrations of HO x (H, OH, HO 2 ), and NO x (NO, NO 2 ) radicals are highly sensitive to assumptions made about their future emissions. Additionally, increases in GHG concentrations are expected to lead to an acceleration of the Brewer-Dobson circulation (BDC; Butchart et al, 2006Butchart et al, , 2010Shepherd and McLandress, 2011;Hardiman et al, 2014;Palmeiro et al, 2014), which may affect ozone concentrations directly through transport (e.g. Plumb, 1996;Avallone and Prather, 1996) and by influencing the chemical lifetimes of Cl y , NO y , and HO x source gases (e.g.…”

Subdiurnal to Interannual Frequency Analysis of Observed and Modeled Reflected Shortwave Radiation From Earth

“…Model radiative fluxes are taken from the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) which provides 3‐hourly flux values for 1 year (2008) and includes the following models: CNRM‐CM5 (Voldoire et al., 2013), MRI‐CGCM3 (Yukimoto et al., 2012), and HadGEM2‐ES (Jones et al., 2011), and 21 years for the CanESM2 model. The CMIP6 model we use is AWI‐CM‐1‐1 (Semmler et al., 2020). The 3‐hourly fluxes are convolved with a mask with the time‐varying portion of the Earth that is within the field‐of‐view of the DSCOVR instrument, and this convolution is area‐averaged to produce global fluxes.…”