The Physics behind Precipitation Onset Bias in CMIP6 Models: The Pseudo-Entrainment Diagnostic and Trade-Offs between Lapse Rate and Humidity

Abstract

Abstract Conditional instability and the buoyancy of plumes drive moist convection but have a variety of representations in model convective schemes. Vertical thermodynamic structure information from Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) sites and reanalysis (ERA5), satellite-derived precipitation (TRMM3b42), and diagnostics relevant for plume buoyancy are used to assess climate models. Previous work has shown that CMIP6 models represent moist convective processes more accurately than their CMIP5 counterparts. However, certain biases in convective onset remain pervasive among generations of CMIP modeling efforts. We diagnose these biases in a cohort of nine CMIP6 models with subdaily output, assessing conditional instability in profiles of equivalent potential temperature, θe, and saturation equivalent potential temperature, θes, in comparison to a plume model with different mixing assumptions. Most models capture qualitative aspects of the θes vertical structure, including a substantial decrease with height in the lower free troposphere associated with the entrainment of subsaturated air. We define a “pseudo-entrainment” diagnostic that combines subsaturation and a θes measure of conditional instability similar to what entrainment would produce under the small-buoyancy approximation. This captures the trade-off between larger θes lapse rates (entrainment of dry air) and small subsaturation (permits positive buoyancy despite high entrainment). This pseudo-entrainment diagnostic is also a reasonable indicator of the critical value of integrated buoyancy for precipitation onset. Models with poor θe/θes structure (those using variants of the Tiedtke scheme) or low entrainment runs of CAM5, and models with low subsaturation, such as NASA-GISS, lie outside the observational range in this diagnostic.