Strong constraints on aerosol-cloud interactions from volcanic eruptions.

Aerosols have a potentially large effect on climate, particularly through their interactions with clouds, but the magnitude of this effect is highly uncertain. Large volcanic eruptions produce sulfur dioxide, which in turn produces aerosols; these eruptions thus represent a natural experiment through which to quantify aerosol-cloud interactions. Here we show that the massive 2014-2015 fissure eruption in Holuhraun, Iceland, reduced the size of liquid cloud droplets-consistent with expectations-but had no discernible effect on other cloud properties. The reduction in droplet size led to cloud brightening and global-mean radiative forcing of around -0.2 watts per square metre for September to October 2014. Changes in cloud amount or cloud liquid water path, however, were undetectable, indicating that these indirect effects, and cloud systems in general, are well buffered against aerosol changes. This result will reduce uncertainties in future climate projections, because we are now able to reject results from climate models with an excessive liquid-water-path response

Exploring Impacts of Size-Dependent Evaporation and Entrainment in a Global Model

While most observations indicate well-buffered clouds to aerosol perturbations, global models do not. Among the suggested mechanisms for this discrepancy is the models' lack of connections between cloud droplet size and two processes that can contribute to reduced cloudiness when droplets become more numerous and smaller: evaporation and entrainment. In this study, we explore different implementations of size-dependent evaporation and entrainment in the global atmospheric model CAM5.3-Oslo.We study their impact on the preindustrial-to-present day change in liquid water path (LWPPD-PI) and the corresponding aerosol indirect effect (AIEPD-PI). Impacts of the 2014–2015 fissure eruption in Holuhraun, Iceland, are also presented. Our entrainment modifications only have a moderate effect on AIEPD-PI (changes from −1.07Wm−2 to −0.98Wm−2), and a small impact on the signal from the Holuhraun eruption compared to other suggested compensating mechanisms. Simulations with added size-dependent evaporation in the top of the stratiform clouds also show small evaporation differences between PI and PD. Moderate changes in AIEPD-PI were achieved when also including an entrainment feedback to the evaporation changes, mixing air between the cloudtop layer and the layer above. These changes were not associated with the size dependency, but changes in the cloud susceptibility to aerosols in both PI and PD when adding evaporation.We find that increased evaporation of smaller droplets at stratiform cloud tops can reduce LWP, but can increase LWP in some areas due to enhanced shallow convection caused by destabilization

Evaluation of aerosol and cloud properties in three climate models using MODIS observations and its corresponding COSP simulator, as well as their application in aerosol-cloud interactions

The evaluation of modelling diagnostics with appropriate observations is an important task that establishes the capabilities and reliability of models. In this study we compare aerosol and cloud properties obtained from three different climate models (ECHAM-HAM, ECHAM-HAM-SALSA, and NorESM) with satellite observations using Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) data. The simulator MODIS-COSP version 1.4 was implemented into the climate models to obtain MODIS-like cloud diagnostics, thus enabling model-to-model and model-to-satellite comparisons. Cloud droplet number concentrations (CDNCs) are derived identically from MODIS-COSP-simulated and MODIS-retrieved values of cloud optical depth and effective radius. For CDNC, the models capture the observed spatial distribution of higher values typically found near the coasts, downwind of the major continents, and lower values over the remote ocean and land areas. However, the COSP-simulated CDNC values are higher than those observed, whilst the direct model CDNC output is significantly lower than the MODIS-COSP diagnostics. NorESM produces large spatial biases for ice cloud properties and thick clouds over land. Despite having identical cloud modules, ECHAM-HAM and ECHAM-HAM-SALSA diverge in their representation of spatial and vertical distributions of clouds. From the spatial distributions of aerosol optical depth (AOD) and aerosol index (AI), we find that NorESM shows large biases for AOD over bright land surfaces, while discrepancies between ECHAM-HAM and ECHAM-HAM-SALSA can be observed mainly over oceans. Overall, the AIs from the different models are in good agreement globally, with higher negative biases in the Northern Hemisphere. We evaluate the aerosol–cloud interactions by computing the sensitivity parameter ACICDNC=dln⁡(CDNC)/dln⁡(AI) on a global scale. However, 1 year of data may be considered not enough to assess the similarity or dissimilarities of the models due to large temporal variability in cloud properties. This study shows how simulators facilitate the evaluation of cloud properties and expose model deficiencies, which are necessary steps to further improve the parameterisation in climate models

Overview of the Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM2) and key climate response of CMIP6 DECK, historical, and scenario simulations

The second version of the coupled Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM2) is presented and evaluated. NorESM2 is based on the second version of the Community Earth System Model (CESM2) and shares with CESM2 the computer code infrastructure and many Earth system model components. However, NorESM2 employs entirely different ocean and ocean biogeochemistry models. The atmosphere component of NorESM2 (CAM-Nor) includes a different module for aerosol physics and chemistry, including interactions with cloud and radiation; additionally, CAM-Nor includes improvements in the formulation of local dry and moist energy conservation, in local and global angular momentum conservation, and in the computations for deep convection and air–sea fluxes. The surface components of NorESM2 have minor changes in the albedo calculations and to land and sea-ice models. We present results from simulations with NorESM2 that were carried out for the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). Two versions of the model are used: one with lower (∼ 2∘) atmosphere–land resolution and one with medium (∼ 1∘) atmosphere–land resolution. The stability of the pre-industrial climate and the sensitivity of the model to abrupt and gradual quadrupling of CO2 are assessed, along with the ability of the model to simulate the historical climate under the CMIP6 forcings. Compared to observations and reanalyses, NorESM2 represents an improvement over previous versions of NorESM in most aspects. NorESM2 appears less sensitive to greenhouse gas forcing than its predecessors, with an estimated equilibrium climate sensitivity of 2.5 K in both resolutions on a 150-year time frame; however, this estimate increases with the time window and the climate sensitivity at equilibration is much higher. We also consider the model response to future scenarios as defined by selected Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project defined under CMIP6. Under the four scenarios (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5), the warming in the period 2090–2099 compared to 1850–1879 reaches 1.3, 2.2, 3.0, and 3.9 K in NorESM2-LM, and 1.3, 2.1, 3.1, and 3.9 K in NorESM-MM, robustly similar in both resolutions. NorESM2-LM shows a rather satisfactory evolution of recent sea-ice area. In NorESM2-LM, an ice-free Arctic Ocean is only avoided in the SSP1-2.6 scenario

Overview of the Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM2) and key climate response of CMIP6 DECK, historical, and scenario simulations

Abstract. The second version of the coupled Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM2) is presented and evaluated. NorESM2 is based on the second version of the Community Earth System Model (CESM2) and shares with CESM2 the computer code infrastructure and many Earth system model components. However, NorESM2 employs entirely different ocean and ocean biogeochemistry models. The atmosphere component of NorESM2 (CAM-Nor) includes a different module for aerosol physics and chemistry, including interactions with cloud and radiation; additionally, CAM-Nor includes improvements in the formulation of local dry and moist energy conservation, in local and global angular momentum conservation, and in the computations for deep convection and air–sea fluxes. The surface components of NorESM2 have minor changes in the albedo calculations and to land and sea-ice models. We present results from simulations with NorESM2 that were carried out for the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). Two versions of the model are used: one with lower (∼ 2∘) atmosphere–land resolution and one with medium (∼ 1∘) atmosphere–land resolution. The stability of the pre-industrial climate and the sensitivity of the model to abrupt and gradual quadrupling of CO2 are assessed, along with the ability of the model to simulate the historical climate under the CMIP6 forcings. Compared to observations and reanalyses, NorESM2 represents an improvement over previous versions of NorESM in most aspects. NorESM2 appears less sensitive to greenhouse gas forcing than its predecessors, with an estimated equilibrium climate sensitivity of 2.5 K in both resolutions on a 150-year time frame; however, this estimate increases with the time window and the climate sensitivity at equilibration is much higher. We also consider the model response to future scenarios as defined by selected Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project defined under CMIP6. Under the four scenarios (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5), the warming in the period 2090–2099 compared to 1850–1879 reaches 1.3, 2.2, 3.0, and 3.9 K in NorESM2-LM, and 1.3, 2.1, 3.1, and 3.9 K in NorESM-MM, robustly similar in both resolutions. NorESM2-LM shows a rather satisfactory evolution of recent sea-ice area. In NorESM2-LM, an ice-free Arctic Ocean is only avoided in the SSP1-2.6 scenario

Strong constraints on aerosol-cloud interactions from volcanic eruptions

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Springer Nature via the DOI in this record.Aerosols have a potentially large effect on climate, particularly through their interactions with clouds, but the magnitude of this effect is highly uncertain. Large volcanic eruptions produce sulfur dioxide, which in turn produces aerosols; these eruptions thus represent a natural experiment through which to quantify aerosol–cloud interactions. Here we show that the massive 2014–2015 fissure eruption in Holuhraun, Iceland, reduced the size of liquid cloud droplets—consistent with expectations—but had no discernible effect on other cloud properties. The reduction in droplet size led to cloud brightening and global-mean radiative forcing of around −0.2 watts per square metre for September to October 2014. Changes in cloud amount or cloud liquid water path, however, were undetectable, indicating that these indirect effects, and cloud systems in general, are well buffered against aerosol changes. This result will reduce uncertainties in future climate projections, because we are now able to reject results from climate models with an excessive liquid-water-path response.JMH, AJ, MD, BTJ, CEJ, JRK and FMOC were supported by the Joint UK BEIS/Defra Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme (GA01101). The National Center for Atmospheric Research is sponsored by the U.S. National Science Foundation. SB and LC are respectively Research Fellow and Research Associate funded by F.R.S.-FNRS. PS acknowledges support from the European Research Council (ERC) project ACCLAIM (Grant Agreement FP7-280025). JMH, FFM, DGP and PS were part funded by the UK Natural Environment Research Council project ACID-PRUF (NE/I020148/1). AS was funded by an Academic Research Fellowship from the University of Leeds and a NERC urgency grant NE/M021130/1 (The source and longevity of sulphur in an Icelandic flood basalt eruption plume). RA was supported by the NERC SMURPHS project NE/N006054/1. GWM was funded by the National Centre for Atmospheric Science, one of the UK Natural Environment Research Council’s research centres. DPG is funded by the School of Earth and Environment at the University of Leeds. GWM and SD acknowledge additional EU funding from the ERC under the FP7 consortium project MACC-II (grant agreement 283576) and Horizon 2020 project MACC-III (grant agreement 633080). GWM, KSC and DG were also supported through the financial support via the Leeds-Met Office Academic Partnership (ASCI project). The work done with CAM5-Oslo is supported by the Research Council of Norway through the EVA project (grant 229771), NOTUR project nn2345k and NorStore project ns2345k