Böning, Claus W.

Griffies, S.

Treguier, A.-M.

OceanRep

3At present only the first version of the CORE forcing (CF1), updated through 2004, is being distributed through the Geo-physical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (http://data1.gfdl.noaa.gov/nomads/forms/mom4/CORE.html). The main differences are that wind direction is unaltered and the humidity adjustment is made to relative humidity such that there is a drying in the equatorial Pacific instead an increase in specific humidity. CF1 includes a single annual cycle of «Normal Year Forcing» that is constructed to give the same climatological pseudo fluxes to transition smoothly when used for repeat annual forcing and to retain high frequency storm events. An alternative forcing, based on the 15 year ECMWF reanalysis, is described by Roske (2006). It places a higher premium on resolution, uses reanalysis radia-tion, as well as precipitation over both ocean and land, and can’t be updated beyond 1993. The data set is «closed» using the inverse procedure of Isemer et al. (1989), so it is not inde-pendent of observed ocean tranport estimates. ReferencesBryden, H. L., and S. Imawaki, 2001: Ocean heat transport. In: Ocean Circulation and Climate, G. Siedler, J. Church, and J. Gould, Eds., Academic Press, International Geophysics Se-ries, 77, 317—336.Chin, T. M., R. F. Milliff, and W. G. Large, 1998: Basin-scale high-wavenumber sea surface wind fields from multiresolution analysis of scatterometer data. Journal of Atmosphere and Ocean Technology, 15, 741—763.Huffman, G. R., R. F. Adler, P. Arkin, A. Chang, R. Ferraro, R. Gruber, J. Janowiak, A. McNab, B. Rudolf, and U. Schneider, 1997: The global precipitation climatology project (GPCP) com-bined precipitation data set. Bulletin of the American Meteoro-logical Society, 78, 5—20. Kalnay, E., M. Kanamitsu, R. Kistler, W. Collins, D. Deaven, L. Grandin, M. Iredell, S. Saha, G. White, J. Woollen, Y. Zhu, M. Chelliah, W. Ebisuzaki, W. Higgins, J. Janowiak, K. C. Mo, C. Ropelewski, A. Leetmaa, R. Reynolds, and R. Jenne, 1996: The NCEP/NCAR 40-year reanalysis project. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 77, 437—471.Large, W. G., and S. G. Yeager, 2004: Diurnal to decadal global forcing for ocean and sea ice models: The data sets and climatologies. NCAR Technical Report, TN-460+STR, 105pp.Isemer, H. –J., J. Willebrand, and L. Hasse, 1989: Fine ad-justments of large scale air-sea energy flux parameterizations by direct estimates of ocean heat transport. Journal of Climate, 2, 1173—1184.Roske, F., 2006: A global heat and freshwater forcing data-set for ocean models. Ocean Modelling, 11, 235—297.M. C. Serreze, and C. M. Hurst, 2000: Representation of mean Arctic precipitation from NCEP-NCAR and ERA reanaly-ses. Journal of Climate, 13, 182—201.Smith, S. R., D. M. Legler, and K. V. Verzone, 2001: Quanti-fying uncertainties in NCEP reanalyses using high-quality vessel observations. Journal of Climate, 14, 4062—4072.Wijffels, S. E., 2001: Ocean transport of freshwater. In: Ocean Circulation and Climate, G. Siedler, J. Church, and J. Gould, Eds., Academic Press, International Geophysics Se-ries, 77, 475—488.Xie, P., and P. A. Arkin: 1996: Analyses of global monthly precipitation using gauge Observations, satellite estimates, and numerical model predictions. Journal of Climate, 9, 840—858.Zhang, Y. C., W. B. Rossow, A. A. Lacis, V. Oinas, and M. I. Mishchenko: 2004. Calculation of radiative flux profiles from the surface to top-of-atmosphere based on ISCCP and other global datasets: Refinements of the radiative transfer model and the input data. Journal of Geophysical Research, 109, doi: 10.1029/2003JD004457.1. IntroductionSimulations with coupled ocean-ice models are commonly used to assist in understanding climate dynamics, and as a step towards the development of more complete earth sys-tem models. Unfortunately, there is little consensus in the global modelling community regarding the design of ocean-ice experiments, especially those run for centennial and lon-ger time scales. Furthermore, differences in forcing methods can lead to large deviations in circulation behaviour and sen-sitivities.Members of the CLIVAR Working Group for Ocean Mod-el Development (WGOMD) have been addressing various as-pects of the issue of forcing ocean-ice models. The result of Design Considerations for Coordinated Ocean-Ice Reference ExperimentsStephen.Grifﬁes NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics LaboratoryPrinceton, USAClaus Böning Leibniz IfM-GEOMARKiel, GermanyAnne MarieTreguier Labortorie de Physique deOcéansIFREMERPlouzané, France4this effort is the Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (COREs). COREs do not resolve problems related to forcing global ocean-ice models. Rather, COREs highlight difficulties, and provide a means to lift disparate modelling efforts onto a common plateau from which alternative experimental designs and forcing data sets can be systematically explored.2. Boundary fluxes for ocean-ice modelsA coupled ocean-ice model requires momentum, thermal, and hydrological fluxes to drive the simulated ocean and ice fields. When decoupling the ocean and sea ice models from the at-mosphere, one must introduce a method to generate these fluxes. Three general approaches have been used. The first is to damp sea surface temperature (SST) and salinity (SSS) to prescribed values. This approach is reasonable since SST anomalies experience a negative feedback in the climate sys-tem (Haney, 1971), whereby they are damped by interactions with the atmosphere. Unfortunately, the thermohaline fluxes generated can be quite unrealistic (Killworth et al., 2000; Large et al., 1997). A complement is to use undamped thermohaline fluxes from a dataset. However, fluxes from observations and/or reanalysis products have huge error bars (Taylor, 2000; Large and Yeager, 2004). Running ocean-ice models for decades or longer with such large uncertainties, especially absent a restor-ing flux, leads to unacceptable model drift (Rosati and Miya-koda, 1988). A third approach prognostically computes turbu-lent fluxes for heat, moisture, and momentum from a planetary boundary layer scheme (Parkinson and Washington, 1979; Barnier et al., 1995; Barnier, 1998), in addition to applying ra-diative heating, precipitation and river runoff. Turbulent fluxes are computed from bulk formulae as a function of the ocean surface state (SST and surface currents) and a prescribed at-mospheric state (air temperature, humidity, sea level pressure, and wind velocity or wind speed).The third method is proposed for COREs since it is closest to what is used in earth system models. Hence, it is important to recognize its limitations. A fundamental problem relates to the use of a prescribed and nonresponsive atmosphere that effectively has an infinite heat capacity and infinite moisture ca-pacity. This situation is the converse to what occurs in Nature, where the ocean has a far larger heat and moisture capacity than the atmosphere. We summarize two problems that arise when running ocean-ice models with a fixed atmospheric state.2.1. Salinity fluxes and mixed boundary conditionsRelatively strong salinity restoring, analogous to the effective restoring of SSTs arising from bulk formulae, can reduce drift in the ocean-ice simulations. However, salinity restoring has no physical basis. It is thus desirable physically to use weak restoring. Weak restoring also has the benefit of allowing in-creased, and typically more realistic, variability in the surface salinity and deep circulation. Unfortunately, when the restor-ing timescale for SSS is much longer than the effective SST restoring timescale, the thermohaline fluxes move into a re-gime commonly known as mixed boundary conditions (Bry-an, 1987). Stommel (1961) showed that ideal thermohaline systems forced with mixed boundary conditions admit mul-tiple equilibria. Mixed boundary condition simulations can be susceptible to unrealistically large amplitude thermohaline oscillations, as well as a polar halocline catastrophe, in which a fresh cap develops in high latitudes of the North Atlantic and shuts down the overturning circulation (Zhang et al., 1993; Rahmstorf and Willebrand, 1995; Rahmstorf et al., 1996; Lohmann et al., 1996).2.2. Absence of an atmospheric response as the ice edge movesWindy, cold, and dry air is often found near the sea ice edge in Nature. Interaction of this air with the ocean leads to large flux-es of latent and sensible heat which cool the surface ocean, as well as evaporation which increases salinity. This huge buoy-ancy loss increases surface density, which provides a critical element in the downward branch of the thermohaline circula-tion (e.g., Marshall and Schott, 1999).When the sea ice edge and/or halocline moves, the region of large air-sea fluxes also moves when the atmosphere is al-lowed to evolve, as in an earth system model with an interactive atmosphere. In contrast, when the atmospheric state is pre-scribed and the simulated sea ice edge moves, the air-sea fluxes are spuriously shut down in the ocean-ice simulation. The ocean column becomes prone to freshwater pooling at the surface, and this provides a positive feedback on the heat flux reduction. This process is similar to the polar halocline catas-trophe of mixed boundary conditions mentioned above. The net effect is to weaken the simulated thermohaline circulation.3. A proposal for COREsEven a perfect ocean-ice model is exposed to limitations in-herent in computing fluxes from a prescribed and nonrespon-sive atmospheric state. Nonetheless, working under the as-sumption that we wish to conduct productive research and developmentwith ocean-ice models, we seek a standard modelling practice to help establish benchmark simulations, thus facilitating comparisons and further refinements to the flux data sets and experimental design.3.1. The Large and Yeager datasetIn order to be widely applicable in global ocean-ice model-ling, a dataset should produce near zero global mean heat and freshwater fluxes when used in combination with ob-served SSTs. This criteria precludes the direct use of atmo-spheric reanalysis products. As discussed in Taylor (2000), a combination of reanalysis and remote sensing products pro-vides a reasonable choice to force global ocean-ice models. That is the approach taken by Large and Yeager (2004). Fur-thermore, it is desirable for many research purposes to pro-vide both a repeating «normal» year forcing (NYF) as well as an interannually varying forcing. The Large and Yeager (2004) NYF is derived from the 43 years of interannual varying forc-ing. Access to the dataset, Fortran code for the bulk formu-lae, technical report, support code, and release notes are freely available at nomads.gfdl.noaa.gov/nomads/forms/mom4/CORE.html3.2. Three proposed COREsThe WGOMD has proposed three COREs, whose elements are outlined here.• CORE-I: This experiment is aimed at investigations of the climatological mean ocean and sea ice states realized using the idealized repeating NYF of Large and Yeager (2004). Models should ideally be run to quasi-equilibrium of the deep circulation (order hundreds to thousands of years). Preliminary tests (Griffies et al., 2007) indicate that 500 years is suitable for many metrics.• CORE-II: This experiment is aimed at investigations of the forced response of the ocean and/or ocean hindcast. It therefore employs the interannual varying dataset of Large and Yeager (2004).5• CORE-III: This is a perturbation experiment involving ideas proposed by Gerdes et al. (2006). Here, enhanced fresh water enters the North Atlantic in response to increased meltwater runoff distributed around the Greenland coast. Response of the regional and global ocean and sea ice sys-tem on the decadal to centennial time scales is the focus of CORE-III.3.3. Status of CORE simulationsModelling groups at GFDL, Kiel, KNMI, MPI, and NCAR have explored the CORE-I suite of experiments (Griffies et al., 2007). Each group used the CCSM bulk formulae, reflecting the approach used to develop the Large and Yeager (2004) dataset. Salinity or fresh water forcing was a frequent point of debate, largely due to difficulties raised in Section 2. Each group used their favorite salinity restoring, with restoring to the same salinity dataset.Analyses of water mass properties, sea ice distribution, tropical circulation, overturning circulation, etc., have re-vealed a wide spread amongst the above models for certain metrics (e.g., overturning circulation), and general agree-ment for other metrics (e.g., tropical circulation). As for many other model comparison projects, these early results raise more questions than they answer. Thus, fully understanding the simulation differences will require further research. We consider this outcome a successful illustration of the CORE idea in that it (A) provided a common experimental platform to compare a wide class of global ocean-ice models, (B) has provoked many new research projects in hopes of furthering our understanding of the ocean-ice climate system.ReferencesBarnier, B.: Forcing the ocean, in Ocean Modeling and Parameterization, edited by E. P. Chassignet and J. Verron, vol. 516 of NATO ASI Mathematical and Physical Sciences Series, pp. 45—80, Kluwer, 1998.Barnier, B., Siefridt, L., and Marchesiello, P.: Thermal forcing for a global ocean circulation model using a three-year climatology of ECMWF analyses., Journal of Marine Re-search, 6, 363—380, 1995.Bryan, F.: Parameter sensitivity of primitive equation ocean general circulation models, Journal of Physical Ocean-ography, 17, 970—985, 1987.Gerdes, R., Hurlin,W., and Griffies, S.: Sensitivity of a global ocean model to increased run-off from Greenland, Ocean Modelling, 12, 416–435, 2006.Griffies, S. M., Biastoch, A., Böning, C., Bryan, F., Chas-signet, E., England, M., Gerdes, R., Hallberg, R. W., Ha-zeleger, W., Large, B., Samuels, B. L., Scheinert, M., Schweck-endiek, U., Severijns, C. A., Treguier, A. M., Winton, M., and Yeager, S.: A Proposal for Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (COREs), in prep, 2007.Haney, R. L.: Surface Thermal Boundary Conditions for Ocean Circulation Models, Journal of Physical Oceanography, 1, 241—248, 1971.Killworth, P. D., Smeed, D., and Nurser, A.: The effects on ocean models of relaxation toward observations at the sur-face, Journal of Physical Oceanography, 30, 160—174, 2000.Large, W. and Yeager, S.: Diurnal to decadal global forcing for ocean and sea-ice models: the data sets and flux climatolo-gies, NCAR Technical Note: NCAR/TN-460+STR, CGD Divi-sion of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, 2004.Large,W. G., Danabasoglu, G., Doney, S. C., and McWil-liams, J. C.: Sensitivity to surface forcing and boundary layer mixing in a global ocean model: annual-mean climatology, Journal of Physical Oceanography, 27, 2418—2447, 1997.Lohmann, G., Gerdes, R., and Chen, D.: Sensitivity of the thermohaline circulation in coupled oceanic GCM–atmo-spheric EBM experiments, Climate Dynamics, 12, 403—416, 1996.Marshall, J. and Schott, F.: Open-ocean convection: ob-servations, theory, and models, Reviews of Geophysics, 37, 1—64, 1999.Parkinson, C. and Washington, W.: A large-scale numer-ical model of sea ice, Journal of Geophysical Research, 84, 311—337, 1979.Rahmstorf, S. and Willebrand, J.: The Role of Tempera-ture Feedback in Stabilizing the Thermohaline Circulation, Journal of Physical Oceanography, 25, 787—805, 1995.Rahmstorf, S., Marotzke, J., and Willebrand, J.: Stability of the thermohaline circulation, in The Warmwatersphere of the North Atlantic, edited byW. Krauss, pp. 129—157, Born-traeger, 1996.Rosati, A. and Miyakoda, K.: A general circulation model for upper ocean simulation, Journal of Physica Oceanography, 18, 1601—1626, 1988.Stommel, H.: Thermohaline convection with two stable regies of flow, Tellus, 13, 224—228, 1961.Taylor, P.: Final Report of the Joint WCRP/SCOR Working Group on Air-Sea Fluxes: Intercomparison and validation of ocean-atmosphere energy flux fields, WCRP-112, WMO/TD-No.1036, p. 303pp, World Climate Research Programme, 2000.Zhang, S., Greatbatch, R., and Lin, C.: A re-examination of the polar halocline catastrophe and implications for coupled ocean-atmosphere models, Journal of Physical Oceanogra-phy, 23, 287—299, 1993.Get the latest news about WCRP science, personalities and upcoming events from the WCRP Newsletter «EZINE» published by JPS for WCRP in Geneva. Download the December 2006 (No. 4) and March 2007 (No. 5) EZINE issue from http://wcrp.wmo.int/pdf/WCRPezine_Dec06.pdfCall for contributions:We invite contributions to the next issue of Flux News, which will be a regular issue. We welcome articles on a wide range of topics related to air-sea fluxes.The closing date for submissions is 15 June 2007.

Design considerations for Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

OceanRep