Abstract

The same prescribed anthropogenic aerosol forcing was implemented into three climate models. The atmosphere components of these participating climate models were the GAMIL, ECHAM, and CAM models. Ensemble simulations were carried out to obtain a reliable estimate of anthropogenic aerosol effective radiative forcing (ERF). The ensemble mean ERFs from these three participating models with this aerosol forcing were −0.27, −0.63, and −0.54 W∙m−2. The model diversity in ERF is clearly reduced as compared with those based on the models’ own default approaches (−1.98, −0.21, and −2.22 W∙m−2). This is consistent with the design of this aerosol forcing. The modeled ERF can be decomposed into two basic components, i.e., the instantaneous radiative forcing (RF) from aerosol–radiation interactions (RFari) and the aerosol-induced changes in cloud forcing (△Fcloud*). For the three participating models, the model diversity in RFari (−0.21, −0.33, and −0.29 W∙m−2) could be constrained by reducing the differences in natural aerosol radiative forcings. However, it was difficult to figure out the reason for the model diversity in △Fcloud* (−0.05, −0.28, and −0.24 W∙m−2), which was the dominant source of the model diversity in ERF. The variability of modeled ERF was also studied. Ensemble simulations showed that the modeled RFs were very stable. The rapid adjustments (ERF − RF) had an important role to play in the quantification of the perturbation of ERF. Fortunately, the contribution from the rapid adjustments to the mean ERF was very small. This study also showed that we should pay attention to the difference between the aerosol climate effects we want and the aerosol climate effects we calculate.

Highlights

  • Anthropogenic aerosols are thought to be responsible for the second largest source of anthropogenic radiative perturbations [1,2,3,4,5]

  • It is important to note that the uncertainty in the anthropogenic aerosol Twomey effect from MACv2-SP is higher than the aerosol optical properties [22], and that the representation of “aci” in climate models is much more complex than “ari” [16,26,27,28,29]

  • The Twomey effect is represented by the normalized change in cloud droplet number, which ensures that the proportional change in cloud droplet number concentration (N) due to anthropogenic aerosols is insensitive to background N

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Anthropogenic aerosols are thought to be responsible for the second largest source of anthropogenic radiative perturbations [1,2,3,4,5]. Atmosphere 2019, 10, 456 models differ widely in estimating aerosol effects [4,14,20,21] To reduce this kind of uncertainty in climate models, a given distribution of anthropogenic aerosol direct radiative forcing and an associated. It is important to note that the uncertainty in the anthropogenic aerosol Twomey effect from MACv2-SP is higher than the aerosol optical properties [22], and that the representation of “aci” in climate models is much more complex than “ari” [16,26,27,28,29]. One participating climate model is modified to diagnose the RF caused by the Twomey effect This helps us to identify the uncertainty sources in calculating the ERFs from the Twomey effect that stay hidden in the model complex.

MACv2-SP
Participating Models
Description of Experiments
Methods Used to Estimate Aerosol Effects
3.3.Results
The Climate Effects of Anthropogenic Aerosols
Twomey
Contributions from “Ari”
Anthropogenic
Contributions fromare “Aci”
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call