Influence of non-feedback variations of radiation on the determination of climate feedback

Recent studies have estimated the magnitude of climate feedback based on the correlation between time variations in outgoing radiation flux and sea surface temperature (SST). This study investigates the influence of the natural non-feedback variation (noise) of the flux occurring independently of SST on the determination of climate feedback. The observed global monthly radiation flux is used from the Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) for the period 2000–2008. In the observations, the time lag correlation of radiation and SST shows a distorted curve with low statistical significance for shortwave radiation while a significant maximum at zero lag for longwave radiation over the tropics. This observational feature is explained by simulations with an idealized energy balance model where we see that the non-feedback variation plays the most significant role in distorting the curve in the lagged correlation graph, thus obscuring the exact value of climate feedback. We also demonstrate that the climate feedback from the tropical longwave radiation in the CERES data is not significantly affected by the noise. We further estimate the standard deviation of radiative forcings (mainly from the noise) relative to that of the non-radiative forcings, i.e., the noise level from the observations and atmosphere–ocean coupled climate model simulations in the framework of the simple model. The estimated noise levels in both CERES (>13 %) and climate models (11–28 %) are found to be far above the critical level (~5 %) that begins to misrepresent climate feedback.Korea. Meteorological Administration. Research and Development Program (grant CATER 2012–3064)National Research Foundation of Korea (MSIP) (2009-83527

Increasing vertical resolution in US models to improve track forecasts of Hurricane Joaquin with HWRF as an example

The atmosphere−ocean coupled Hurricane Weather Research and Forecast model (HWRF) developed at the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) is used as an example to illustrate the impact of model vertical resolution on track forecasts of tropical cyclones. A number of HWRF forecasting experiments were carried out at different vertical resolutions for Hurricane Joaquin, which occurred from September 27 to October 8, 2015, in the Atlantic Basin. The results show that the track prediction for Hurricane Joaquin is much more accurate with higher vertical resolution. The positive impacts of higher vertical resolution on hurricane track forecasts suggest that National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/NCEP should upgrade both HWRF and the Global Forecast System to have more vertical levels

Straight Talk about Climate Change

For over thirty years, I have given talks on the science of climate change. When, however, I speak to a nonexpert audience, and attempt to explain such matters as climate sensitivity, the relation of global mean temperature anomaly to extreme weather, the fact that warming has decreased profoundly for the past eighteen years, etc., it is obvious that the audience’s eyes are glazing over. Although I present evidence as to why the issue is not a catastrophe and may likely be beneficial, the response is puzzlement. I am typically asked how this is possible. After all, 97 percent of scientists agree, several of the hottest years on record have occurred during the past eighteen years, all sorts of extremes have become more common, polar bears are disappearing, Arctic ice is melting, etc. In brief, there is overwhelming evidence of warming, according to the alarmists. I tend to be surprised that anyone could get away with such sophistry and even downright dishonesty, but, unfortunately, many of my listeners believe it. I will try to explain why such claims are evidence of the dishonesty of the alarmist position

Atmospheric Tides in the Latest Generation of Climate Models

For atmospheric tides driven by solar heating, the database of climate model output used in the most recent assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirms and extends the authors’ earlier results based on the previous generation of models. Both the present study and the earlier one examine the surface pressure signature of the tides, but the new database removes a shortcoming of the earlier study in which model simulations were not strictly comparable to observations. The present study confirms an approximate consistency among observations and all model simulations, despite variation of model tops from 31 to 144 km. On its face, this result is surprising because the dominant (semidiurnal) component of the tides is forced mostly by ozone heating around 30–70-km altitude. Classical linear tide calculations and occasional numerical experimentation have long suggested that models with low tops achieve some consistency with observations by means of compensating errors, with wave reflection from the model top making up for reduced ozone forcing. Future work with the new database may confirm this hypothesis by additional classical calculations and analyses of the ozone heating profiles and wave reflection in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) models. The new generation of models also extends CMIP's purview to free-atmosphere fields including the middle atmosphere and above.United States. Dept. of Energy. Office of Science (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344

The Surface-Pressure Signature of Atmospheric Tides in Modern Climate Models

Although atmospheric tides driven by solar heating are readily detectable at the earth’s surface as variations in air pressure, their simulations in current coupled global climate models have not been fully examined. This work examines near-surface-pressure tides in climate models that contributed to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); it compares them with tides both from observations and from the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (WACCM), which extends from the earth’s surface to the thermosphere. Surprising consistency is found among observations and all model simulations, despite variation of the altitudes of model upper boundaries from 32 to 76 km in the IPCC models and at 135 km for WACCM. These results are consistent with previous suggestions that placing a model’s upper boundary at low altitude leads to partly compensating errors—such as reducing the forcing of the tides by ozone heating, but also introducing spurious waves at the upper boundary, which propagate to the surface.National Science Foundation (U.S.)United States. Dept. of Energy. Office of Science (Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344