Assessment of sea ice simulations in the CMIP5 models

• Published in: The Cryosphere
• Main Authors: Shu, Q., Song, Z., Qiao, F.
• Format: Text
• Language: English
• Published: 2018
• Subjects: Antarctic; Arctic; The Antarctic; Antarc*; Sea ice
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-399-2015; https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/9/399/2015/

The historical simulations of sea ice during 1979 to 2005 by the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) are compared with satellite observations, Global Ice-Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System (GIOMAS) output data and Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System (PIOMAS) output data in this study. Forty-nine models, almost all of the CMIP5 climate models and earth system models with historical simulation, are used. For the Antarctic, multi-model ensemble mean (MME) results can give good climatology of sea ice extent (SIE), but the linear trend is incorrect. The linear trend of satellite-observed Antarctic SIE is 1.29 (±0.57) × 10 5 km 2 decade −1 only about 1/7 CMIP5 models show increasing trends, and the linear trend of CMIP5 MME is negative with the value of −3.36 (±0.15) × 10 5 km 2 decade −1 . For the Arctic, both climatology and linear trend are better reproduced. Sea ice volume (SIV) is also evaluated in this study, and this is a first attempt to evaluate the SIV in all CMIP5 models. Compared with the GIOMAS and PIOMAS data, the SIV values in both the Antarctic and the Arctic are too small, especially for the Antarctic in spring and winter. The GIOMAS Antarctic SIV in September is 19.1 × 10 3 km 3 , while the corresponding Antarctic SIV of CMIP5 MME is 13.0 × 10 3 km 3 (almost 32% less). The Arctic SIV of CMIP5 in April is 27.1 × 10 3 km 3 , which is also less than that from PIOMAS SIV (29.5 × 10 3 km 3 ). This means that the sea ice thickness simulated in CMIP5 is too thin, although the SIE is fairly well simulated.