Climatic forcing before, during, and after the 8.2 Kyr B.P. global cooling event

This paper attempts at full characterization of the unique global 8.2 Kyr B.P. cooling event. Significant atmospheric cooling started during 9.5-8.5 Kyr B.P. when the Sun was extremely quiet during three periods of ~ 50-100 years. The flood of melt water in the N. Atlantic from glacial lakes during the demise of the Laurentide ice sheet, starting at ~ 8.5 Kyr B.P., adds to the atmospheric cooling. Climatic forcing events occurred at 8.5 Kyr B.P., at 8.2 Kyr B.P. and finally at 8.06 Kyr B.P., leading to concurrent increases or decreases in the atmospheric Δ 14C levels, completely consistent with the climatic forcing proposed here

Mean biases, variability, and trends in air–sea fluxes and sea surface temperature in the CCSM4

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2012. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of Climate 25 (2012): 7781–7801, doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00442.1.Air–sea fluxes from the Community Climate System Model version 4 (CCSM4) are compared with the Coordinated Ocean-Ice Reference Experiment (CORE) dataset to assess present-day mean biases, variability errors, and late twentieth-century trend differences. CCSM4 is improved over the previous version, CCSM3, in both air–sea heat and freshwater fluxes in some regions; however, a large increase in net shortwave radiation into the ocean may contribute to an enhanced hydrological cycle. The authors provide a new baseline for assessment of flux variance at annual and interannual frequency bands in future model versions and contribute a new metric for assessing the coupling between the atmospheric and oceanic planetary boundary layer (PBL) schemes of any climate model. Maps of the ratio of CCSM4 variance to CORE reveal that variance on annual time scales has larger error than on interannual time scales and that different processes cause errors in mean, annual, and interannual frequency bands. Air temperature and specific humidity in the CCSM4 atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) follow the sea surface conditions much more closely than is found in CORE. Sensible and latent heat fluxes are less of a negative feedback to sea surface temperature warming in the CCSM4 than in the CORE data with the model’s PBL allowing for more heating of the ocean’s surface.The CESM project is supported by the National Science Foundation and the Office of Science (BER) of the U.S. Department of Energy. S. Stevensonwas supported byNASAGrantNNX09A020H and B. Fox-Kemper by Grants NSF 0934737 and NASA NNX09AF38G.2013-05-1

The CCSM4 ocean component

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2012. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of Climate 25 (2012): 1361–1389, doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00091.1.The ocean component of the Community Climate System Model version 4 (CCSM4) is described, and its solutions from the twentieth-century (20C) simulations are documented in comparison with observations and those of CCSM3. The improvements to the ocean model physical processes include new parameterizations to represent previously missing physics and modifications of existing parameterizations to incorporate recent new developments. In comparison with CCSM3, the new solutions show some significant improvements that can be attributed to these model changes. These include a better equatorial current structure, a sharper thermocline, and elimination of the cold bias of the equatorial cold tongue all in the Pacific Ocean; reduced sea surface temperature (SST) and salinity biases along the North Atlantic Current path; and much smaller potential temperature and salinity biases in the near-surface Pacific Ocean. Other improvements include a global-mean SST that is more consistent with the present-day observations due to a different spinup procedure from that used in CCSM3. Despite these improvements, many of the biases present in CCSM3 still exist in CCSM4. A major concern continues to be the substantial heat content loss in the ocean during the preindustrial control simulation from which the 20C cases start. This heat loss largely reflects the top of the atmospheric model heat loss rate in the coupled system, and it essentially determines the abyssal ocean potential temperature biases in the 20C simulations. There is also a deep salty bias in all basins. As a result of this latter bias in the deep North Atlantic, the parameterized overflow waters cannot penetrate much deeper than in CCSM3.NCAR is sponsored by the National Science Foundation. The CCSM is also sponsored by the Department of Energy. SGY was supported by the NOAA Climate Program Office under Climate Variability and Predictability Program Grant NA09OAR4310163.2012-09-0

The impact of oceanic near-inertial waves on climate

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2013. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of Climate 26 (2013): 2833–2844, doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00181.1.The Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4) is used to assess the climate impact of wind-generated near-inertial waves (NIWs). Even with high-frequency coupling, CCSM4 underestimates the strength of NIWs, so that a parameterization for NIWs is developed and included into CCSM4. Numerous assumptions enter this parameterization, the core of which is that the NIW velocity signal is detected during the model integration, and amplified in the shear computation of the ocean surface boundary layer module. It is found that NIWs deepen the ocean mixed layer by up to 30%, but they contribute little to the ventilation and mixing of the ocean below the thermocline. However, the deepening of the tropical mixed layer by NIWs leads to a change in tropical sea surface temperature and precipitation. Atmospheric teleconnections then change the global sea level pressure fields so that the midlatitude westerlies become weaker. Unfortunately, the magnitude of the real air-sea flux of NIW energy is poorly constrained by observations; this makes the quantitative assessment of their climate impact rather uncertain. Thus, a major result of the present study is that because of its importance for global climate the uncertainty in the observed tropical NIW energy has to be reduced.This research was funded as part of the Climate Process Team on internal wave-driven mixing with NSF Grant Nr E0968771 at NCAR.2013-11-0

Mechanisms governing interannual variability of upper-ocean temperature in a global ocean hindcast simulation

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2007. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of Physical Oceanography 37 (2007): 1918-1938, doi:10.1175/jpo3089.1.The interannual variability in upper-ocean (0–400 m) temperature and governing mechanisms for the period 1968–97 are quantified from a global ocean hindcast simulation driven by atmospheric reanalysis and satellite data products. The unconstrained simulation exhibits considerable skill in replicating the observed interannual variability in vertically integrated heat content estimated from hydrographic data and monthly satellite sea surface temperature and sea surface height data. Globally, the most significant interannual variability modes arise from El Niño–Southern Oscillation and the Indian Ocean zonal mode, with substantial extension beyond the Tropics into the midlatitudes. In the well-stratified Tropics and subtropics, net annual heat storage variability is driven predominately by the convergence of the advective heat transport, mostly reflecting velocity anomalies times the mean temperature field. Vertical velocity variability is caused by remote wind forcing, and subsurface temperature anomalies are governed mostly by isopycnal displacements (heave). The dynamics at mid- to high latitudes are qualitatively different and vary regionally. Interannual temperature variability is more coherent with depth because of deep winter mixing and variations in western boundary currents and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current that span the upper thermocline. Net annual heat storage variability is forced by a mixture of local air–sea heat fluxes and the convergence of the advective heat transport, the latter resulting from both velocity and temperature anomalies. Also, density-compensated temperature changes on isopycnal surfaces (spice) are quantitatively significant.This work was supported in part from NOAA Office of Global Programs ACCP Grant NA86GP0290, NSF Grant OCE96-33681, and the WHOI Ocean and Climate Change Institute

The Community Climate System Model version 3 (CCSM3)

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society 2006. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of Climate 19 (2006): 2122–2143, doi:10.1175/JCLI3761.1.The Community Climate System Model version 3 (CCSM3) has recently been developed and released to the climate community. CCSM3 is a coupled climate model with components representing the atmosphere, ocean, sea ice, and land surface connected by a flux coupler. CCSM3 is designed to produce realistic simulations over a wide range of spatial resolutions, enabling inexpensive simulations lasting several millennia or detailed studies of continental-scale dynamics, variability, and climate change. This paper will show results from the configuration used for climate-change simulations with a T85 grid for the atmosphere and land and a grid with approximately 1° resolution for the ocean and sea ice. The new system incorporates several significant improvements in the physical parameterizations. The enhancements in the model physics are designed to reduce or eliminate several systematic biases in the mean climate produced by previous editions of CCSM. These include new treatments of cloud processes, aerosol radiative forcing, land–atmosphere fluxes, ocean mixed layer processes, and sea ice dynamics. There are significant improvements in the sea ice thickness, polar radiation budgets, tropical sea surface temperatures, and cloud radiative effects. CCSM3 can produce stable climate simulations of millennial duration without ad hoc adjustments to the fluxes exchanged among the component models. Nonetheless, there are still systematic biases in the ocean–atmosphere fluxes in coastal regions west of continents, the spectrum of ENSO variability, the spatial distribution of precipitation in the tropical oceans, and continental precipitation and surface air temperatures. Work is under way to extend CCSM to a more accurate and comprehensive model of the earth's climate system.We would like to acknowledge the substantial contributions to and support for the CCSM project from the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy (DOE), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Improving oceanic overflow representation in climate models : the Gravity Current Entrainment Climate Process Team

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2009. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 90 (2009): 657-670, doi:10.1175/2008BAMS2667.1.Oceanic overflows are bottom-trapped density currents originating in semienclosed basins, such as the Nordic seas, or on continental shelves, such as the Antarctic shelf. Overflows are the source of most of the abyssal waters, and therefore play an important role in the large-scale ocean circulation, forming a component of the sinking branch of the thermohaline circulation. As they descend the continental slope, overflows mix vigorously with the surrounding oceanic waters, changing their density and transport significantly. These mixing processes occur on spatial scales well below the resolution of ocean climate models, with the result that deep waters and deep western boundary currents are simulated poorly. The Gravity Current Entrainment Climate Process Team was established by the U.S. Climate Variability and Prediction (CLIVAR) Program to accelerate the development and implementation of improved representations of overflows within large-scale climate models, bringing together climate model developers with those conducting observational, numerical, and laboratory process studies of overflows. Here, the organization of the Climate Process Team is described, and a few of the successes and lessons learned during this collaboration are highlighted, with some emphasis on the well-observed Mediterranean overflow. The Climate Process Team has developed several different overflow parameterizations, which are examined in a hierarchy of ocean models, from comparatively well-resolved regional models to the largest-scale global climate models.The Gravity Current Entrainment Climate Process Team was funded by NSF grants OCE-0336850 and OCE-0611572 and NOAA as a contribution to U.S.CLIVAR

Comparing ocean surface boundary vertical mixing schemes including langmuir turbulence

Six recent Langmuir turbulence parameterization schemes and five traditional schemes are implemented in a common single‐column modeling framework and consistently compared. These schemes are tested in scenarios versus matched large eddy simulations, across the globe with realistic forcing (JRA55‐do, WAVEWATCH‐III simulated waves) and initial conditions (Argo), and under realistic conditions as observed at ocean moorings. Traditional non‐Langmuir schemes systematically underpredict large eddy simulation vertical mixing under weak convective forcing, while Langmuir schemes vary in accuracy. Under global, realistic forcing Langmuir schemes produce 6% (−1% to 14% for 90% confidence) or 5.2 m (−0.2 m to 17.4 m for 90% confidence) deeper monthly mean mixed layer depths than their non‐Langmuir counterparts, with the greatest differences in extratropical regions, especially the Southern Ocean in austral summer. Discrepancies among Langmuir schemes are large (15% in mixed layer depth standard deviation over the mean): largest under wave‐driven turbulence with stabilizing buoyancy forcing, next largest under strongly wave‐driven conditions with weak buoyancy forcing, and agreeing during strong convective forcing. Non‐Langmuir schemes disagree with each other to a lesser extent, with a similar ordering. Langmuir discrepancies obscure a cross‐scheme estimate of the Langmuir effect magnitude under realistic forcing, highlighting limited understanding and numerical deficiencies. Maps of the regions and seasons where the greatest discrepancies occur are provided to guide further studies and observations

A new method for estimating the turbulent heat flux at the bottom of the daily mixed layer

A new method is presented for estimating the vertical turbulent heat flux at the bottom of the daily mixed layer from the temperature data in the mixed layer and net solar irradiance data at the sea surface. We assume that fluctuations in the divergence of advective heat flux have longer than daily time scales. The method is applied to data from the eastern tropical Pacific, where the daily cycle in the temperature field is confined to the upper 10-25 m. The night-to-day difference of the turbulent heat flux calculated from the data obtained during nine daily cycles in November 1984 agrees well on average with the same quantity estimated from microstructure observations. The night-to-day difference of the turbulent heat flux, estimated at several mooring stations near the equator (an average over 100 to 300 daily cycles), varies from 120 to 220 W/m² with larger values on the equator. Equatorial turbulence measurements show that the turbulent heat flux is much larger during nighttime than daytime. Therefore the present estimates give approximately the nighttime average, which is the major part of the turbulent heat flux. From the daytime heat budget we obtain divergence of the low-frequency horizontal heat advection at 1°30’S, 140°W; it is governed by equatorial mesoscale fluctuations having a predominant period of 15-20 days

An assessment of the Arctic Ocean in a suite of interannual CORE-II simulations. Part III: Hydrography and fluxes

In this paper we compare the simulated Arctic Ocean in 15 global ocean–sea ice models in the framework of the Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments, phase II (CORE-II). Most of these models are the ocean and sea-ice components of the coupled climate models used in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) experiments. We mainly focus on the hydrography of the Arctic interior, the state of Atlantic Water layer and heat and volume transports at the gateways of the Davis Strait, the Bering Strait, the Fram Strait and the Barents Sea Opening. We found that there is a large spread in temperature in the Arctic Ocean between the models, and generally large differences compared to the observed temperature at intermediate depths. Warm bias models have a strong temperature anomaly of inflow of the Atlantic Water entering the Arctic Ocean through the Fram Strait. Another process that is not represented accurately in the CORE-II models is the formation of cold and dense water, originating on the eastern shelves. In the cold bias models, excessive cold water forms in the Barents Sea and spreads into the Arctic Ocean through the St. Anna Through. There is a large spread in the simulated mean heat and volume transports through the Fram Strait and the Barents Sea Opening. The models agree more on the decadal variability, to a large degree dictated by the common atmospheric forcing. We conclude that the CORE-II model study helps us to understand the crucial biases in the Arctic Ocean. The current coarse resolution state-of-the-art ocean models need to be improved in accurate representation of the Atlantic Water inflow into the Arctic and density currents coming from the shelves