Arctic Amplification in the Community Earth System Models (CESM1 and CESM2)

We compare the Arctic amplification (AA) produced by the two Community Earth System Models CESM1 and CESM2, members of the CEMIP5 (Coupled Models Intercomparison Project phase 5) and CEMIP6 collections, respectively. We find that the CESM1 model reproduces the recent high values of the AA deduced fr...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Atmosphere
Main Authors: Petr Chylek, Chris Folland, James D. Klett, Glen Lesins, Manvendra K. Dubey
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14050820
https://doaj.org/article/d170b5e695864ba4aac39485d2ee2b1e
_version_ 1821810571287199744
author Petr Chylek
Chris Folland
James D. Klett
Glen Lesins
Manvendra K. Dubey
author_facet Petr Chylek
Chris Folland
James D. Klett
Glen Lesins
Manvendra K. Dubey
author_sort Petr Chylek
collection Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles
container_issue 5
container_start_page 820
container_title Atmosphere
container_volume 14
description We compare the Arctic amplification (AA) produced by the two Community Earth System Models CESM1 and CESM2, members of the CEMIP5 (Coupled Models Intercomparison Project phase 5) and CEMIP6 collections, respectively. We find that the CESM1 model reproduces the recent high values of the AA deduced from the observed temperature much better than the CESM2. The correlation coefficient within the 1970–2012 time period between CESM1-simulated AA and the observed one is 0.47, while the CESM2 simulation leads to an anticorrelation of r = −0.53. Even the more successful model (CESM1) is not able to reproduce recent high AA values of 4–5. The main cause of this failure is the model’s overestimate of the rate of increase in the mean global temperature in years post 1990. When the CESM1 model’s simulated trend of the mean global temperature is replaced in the expression for the AA by the observed temperature trend, the correlation coefficient increases from 0.47 to 0.75. The CESM1 model is among the best north American models in AA simulation while the CESM2 model is among the least successful.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
genre Arctic
genre_facet Arctic
geographic Arctic
geographic_facet Arctic
id ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:d170b5e695864ba4aac39485d2ee2b1e
institution Open Polar
language English
op_collection_id ftdoajarticles
op_doi https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14050820
op_relation https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/14/5/820
https://doaj.org/toc/2073-4433
doi:10.3390/atmos14050820
2073-4433
https://doaj.org/article/d170b5e695864ba4aac39485d2ee2b1e
op_source Atmosphere, Vol 14, Iss 820, p 820 (2023)
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI AG
record_format openpolar
spelling ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:d170b5e695864ba4aac39485d2ee2b1e 2025-01-16T20:16:16+00:00 Arctic Amplification in the Community Earth System Models (CESM1 and CESM2) Petr Chylek Chris Folland James D. Klett Glen Lesins Manvendra K. Dubey 2023-05-01T00:00:00Z https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14050820 https://doaj.org/article/d170b5e695864ba4aac39485d2ee2b1e EN eng MDPI AG https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/14/5/820 https://doaj.org/toc/2073-4433 doi:10.3390/atmos14050820 2073-4433 https://doaj.org/article/d170b5e695864ba4aac39485d2ee2b1e Atmosphere, Vol 14, Iss 820, p 820 (2023) Arctic amplification Arctic climate climate models CESM1 and CESM2 Meteorology. Climatology QC851-999 article 2023 ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14050820 2023-05-28T00:34:38Z We compare the Arctic amplification (AA) produced by the two Community Earth System Models CESM1 and CESM2, members of the CEMIP5 (Coupled Models Intercomparison Project phase 5) and CEMIP6 collections, respectively. We find that the CESM1 model reproduces the recent high values of the AA deduced from the observed temperature much better than the CESM2. The correlation coefficient within the 1970–2012 time period between CESM1-simulated AA and the observed one is 0.47, while the CESM2 simulation leads to an anticorrelation of r = −0.53. Even the more successful model (CESM1) is not able to reproduce recent high AA values of 4–5. The main cause of this failure is the model’s overestimate of the rate of increase in the mean global temperature in years post 1990. When the CESM1 model’s simulated trend of the mean global temperature is replaced in the expression for the AA by the observed temperature trend, the correlation coefficient increases from 0.47 to 0.75. The CESM1 model is among the best north American models in AA simulation while the CESM2 model is among the least successful. Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Arctic Atmosphere 14 5 820
spellingShingle Arctic amplification
Arctic climate
climate models
CESM1 and CESM2
Meteorology. Climatology
QC851-999
Petr Chylek
Chris Folland
James D. Klett
Glen Lesins
Manvendra K. Dubey
Arctic Amplification in the Community Earth System Models (CESM1 and CESM2)
title Arctic Amplification in the Community Earth System Models (CESM1 and CESM2)
title_full Arctic Amplification in the Community Earth System Models (CESM1 and CESM2)
title_fullStr Arctic Amplification in the Community Earth System Models (CESM1 and CESM2)
title_full_unstemmed Arctic Amplification in the Community Earth System Models (CESM1 and CESM2)
title_short Arctic Amplification in the Community Earth System Models (CESM1 and CESM2)
title_sort arctic amplification in the community earth system models (cesm1 and cesm2)
topic Arctic amplification
Arctic climate
climate models
CESM1 and CESM2
Meteorology. Climatology
QC851-999
topic_facet Arctic amplification
Arctic climate
climate models
CESM1 and CESM2
Meteorology. Climatology
QC851-999
url https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14050820
https://doaj.org/article/d170b5e695864ba4aac39485d2ee2b1e