Testing the CMIP6 GCM Simulations versus Surface Temperature Records from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021: High ECS Is Not Supported

The last-generation CMIP6 global circulation models (GCMs) are currently used to interpret past and future climatic changes and to guide policymakers, but they are very different from each other; for example, their equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) varies from 1.83 to 5.67 °C (IPCC AR6, 2021). E...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Climate
Main Author: Scafetta, Nicola
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: 2021
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/11588/861919
https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9110161
id ftunivnapoliiris:oai:www.iris.unina.it:11588/861919
record_format openpolar
spelling ftunivnapoliiris:oai:www.iris.unina.it:11588/861919 2024-06-23T07:50:53+00:00 Testing the CMIP6 GCM Simulations versus Surface Temperature Records from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021: High ECS Is Not Supported Scafetta, Nicola Scafetta, Nicola 2021 http://hdl.handle.net/11588/861919 https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9110161 eng eng info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/wos/WOS:000725386600001 volume:9 issue:11 firstpage:161 numberofpages:30 journal:CLIMATE http://hdl.handle.net/11588/861919 doi:10.3390/cli9110161 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/scopus/2-s2.0-85118936054 https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9110161 CMIP6 climate model temperature record equilibrium climate sensitivity global warming validation and testing info:eu-repo/semantics/article 2021 ftunivnapoliiris https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9110161 2024-06-10T14:58:52Z The last-generation CMIP6 global circulation models (GCMs) are currently used to interpret past and future climatic changes and to guide policymakers, but they are very different from each other; for example, their equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) varies from 1.83 to 5.67 °C (IPCC AR6, 2021). Even assuming that some of them are sufficiently reliable for scenario forecasts, such a large ECS uncertainty requires a pre-selection of the most reliable models. Herein the performance of 38 CMIP6 models are tested in reproducing the surface temperature changes observed from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021 in three temperature records: ERA5-T2m, ERA5-850mb, and UAH MSU v6.0 Tlt. Alternative temperature records are briefly discussed but found to be not appropriate for the present analysis because they miss data over large regions. Significant issues emerge: (1) most GCMs overestimate the warming observed during the last 40 years; (2) there is great variability among the models in reconstructing the climatic changes observed in the Arctic; (3) the ocean temperature is usually overestimated more than the land one; (4) in the latitude bands 40° N–70° N and 50° S–70° S (which lay at the intersection between the Ferrel and the polar atmospheric cells) the CMIP6 GCMs overestimate the warming; (5) similar discrepancies are present in the east-equatorial pacific region (which regulates the ENSO) and in other regions where cooling trends are observed. Finally, the percentage of the world surface where the (positive or negative) model-data discrepancy exceeds 0.2, 0.5 and 1.0 °C is evaluated. The results indicate that the models with low ECS values (for example, 3 °C or less) perform significantly better than those with larger ECS. Therefore, the low ECS models should be preferred for climate change scenario forecasts while the other models should be dismissed and not used by policymakers. In any case, significant model-data discrepancies are still observed over extended world regions for all models: on average, the GCM predictions ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Climate change Global warming IRIS Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II Arctic Pacific Climate 9 11 161
institution Open Polar
collection IRIS Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II
op_collection_id ftunivnapoliiris
language English
topic CMIP6 climate model
temperature record
equilibrium climate sensitivity
global warming
validation and testing
spellingShingle CMIP6 climate model
temperature record
equilibrium climate sensitivity
global warming
validation and testing
Scafetta, Nicola
Testing the CMIP6 GCM Simulations versus Surface Temperature Records from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021: High ECS Is Not Supported
topic_facet CMIP6 climate model
temperature record
equilibrium climate sensitivity
global warming
validation and testing
description The last-generation CMIP6 global circulation models (GCMs) are currently used to interpret past and future climatic changes and to guide policymakers, but they are very different from each other; for example, their equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) varies from 1.83 to 5.67 °C (IPCC AR6, 2021). Even assuming that some of them are sufficiently reliable for scenario forecasts, such a large ECS uncertainty requires a pre-selection of the most reliable models. Herein the performance of 38 CMIP6 models are tested in reproducing the surface temperature changes observed from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021 in three temperature records: ERA5-T2m, ERA5-850mb, and UAH MSU v6.0 Tlt. Alternative temperature records are briefly discussed but found to be not appropriate for the present analysis because they miss data over large regions. Significant issues emerge: (1) most GCMs overestimate the warming observed during the last 40 years; (2) there is great variability among the models in reconstructing the climatic changes observed in the Arctic; (3) the ocean temperature is usually overestimated more than the land one; (4) in the latitude bands 40° N–70° N and 50° S–70° S (which lay at the intersection between the Ferrel and the polar atmospheric cells) the CMIP6 GCMs overestimate the warming; (5) similar discrepancies are present in the east-equatorial pacific region (which regulates the ENSO) and in other regions where cooling trends are observed. Finally, the percentage of the world surface where the (positive or negative) model-data discrepancy exceeds 0.2, 0.5 and 1.0 °C is evaluated. The results indicate that the models with low ECS values (for example, 3 °C or less) perform significantly better than those with larger ECS. Therefore, the low ECS models should be preferred for climate change scenario forecasts while the other models should be dismissed and not used by policymakers. In any case, significant model-data discrepancies are still observed over extended world regions for all models: on average, the GCM predictions ...
author2 Scafetta, Nicola
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Scafetta, Nicola
author_facet Scafetta, Nicola
author_sort Scafetta, Nicola
title Testing the CMIP6 GCM Simulations versus Surface Temperature Records from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021: High ECS Is Not Supported
title_short Testing the CMIP6 GCM Simulations versus Surface Temperature Records from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021: High ECS Is Not Supported
title_full Testing the CMIP6 GCM Simulations versus Surface Temperature Records from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021: High ECS Is Not Supported
title_fullStr Testing the CMIP6 GCM Simulations versus Surface Temperature Records from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021: High ECS Is Not Supported
title_full_unstemmed Testing the CMIP6 GCM Simulations versus Surface Temperature Records from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021: High ECS Is Not Supported
title_sort testing the cmip6 gcm simulations versus surface temperature records from 1980–1990 to 2011–2021: high ecs is not supported
publishDate 2021
url http://hdl.handle.net/11588/861919
https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9110161
geographic Arctic
Pacific
geographic_facet Arctic
Pacific
genre Arctic
Climate change
Global warming
genre_facet Arctic
Climate change
Global warming
op_relation info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/wos/WOS:000725386600001
volume:9
issue:11
firstpage:161
numberofpages:30
journal:CLIMATE
http://hdl.handle.net/11588/861919
doi:10.3390/cli9110161
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/scopus/2-s2.0-85118936054
https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9110161
op_doi https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9110161
container_title Climate
container_volume 9
container_issue 11
container_start_page 161
_version_ 1802641833812033536