Hadley Centre Evaluating modelled and observed trends and variability in ocean heat content Jonathan Gregory 1,2, Helene Banks 1, Peter Stott 1, Jason.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Running a model's adjoint to obtain derivatives, while more efficient and accurate than other methods, such as the finite difference method, is a computationally.
Advertisements

LRF Training, Belgrade 13 th - 16 th November 2013 © ECMWF Sources of predictability and error in ECMWF long range forecasts Tim Stockdale European Centre.
Detection of a direct carbon dioxide effect in continental river runoff records N. Gedney, P. M. Cox, R. A. Betts, O. Boucher, C. Huntingford & P. A. Stott.
4. Ocean Temperature The equilibrated ocean surface temperature anomalies in EPR0 and EPR2 are shown below ( o C). The responses at low latitudes, where.
© Crown copyright Met Office Decadal Climate Prediction Doug Smith, Nick Dunstone, Rosie Eade, Leon Hermanson, Adam Scaife.
Global Warming and Climate Sensitivity Professor Dennis L. Hartmann Department of Atmospheric Sciences University of Washington Seattle, Washington.
Determination of Solar Cycle and Natural Climate Variation using both Surface Air/Soil Temperature and Thermal Diffusion Model Xiquan Dong (Atmospheric.
3. Climate Change 3.1 Observations 3.2 Theory of Climate Change 3.3 Climate Change Prediction 3.4 The IPCC Process.
Outline Further Reading: Detailed Notes Posted on Class Web Sites Natural Environments: The Atmosphere GE 101 – Spring 2007 Boston University Myneni L29:
Earth Systems Science Chapter 6 I. Modeling the Atmosphere-Ocean System 1.Statistical vs physical models; analytical vs numerical models; equilibrium vs.
Detection of Human Influence on Extreme Precipitation 11 th IMSC, Edinburgh, July 2010 Seung-Ki Min 1, Xuebin Zhang 1, Francis Zwiers 1 & Gabi Hegerl.
Outline Further Reading: Detailed Notes Posted on Class Web Sites Natural Environments: The Atmosphere GG 101 – Spring 2005 Boston University Myneni L31:
MET 112 Global Climate Change - Lecture 11 Future Predictions Craig Clements San Jose State University.
The limited contribution of model uncertainty to the uncertainty in observationally-constrained estimates of anthropogenic warming Nathan Gillett, Canadian.
Outline Further Reading: Detailed Notes Posted on Class Web Sites Natural Environments: The Atmosphere GE 101 – Spring 2006 Boston University Myneni L28:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Princeton, NJ Evolution of Stratospheric.
Attribution of Stratospheric Temperature Trends to Forcings A coupled chemistry-climate model (CCM) study Richard S. Stolarski NASA GSFC In collaboration.
Lesson 2 AOSC 621. Radiative equilibrium Where S is the solar constant. The earth reflects some of this radiation. Let the albedo be ρ, then the energy.
The Role of Aerosols in Climate Change Eleanor J. Highwood Department of Meteorology, With thanks to all the IPCC scientists, Keith Shine (Reading) and.
Explaining Changes in Extreme U.S. Climate Events Gerald A. Meehl Julie Arblaster, Claudia Tebaldi.
Rising Temperatures. Various Temperature Reconstructions from
Review High Resolution Modeling of Steric Sea-level Rise Tatsuo Suzuki (FRCGC,JAMSTEC) Understanding Sea-level Rise and Variability 6-9 June, 2006 Paris,
Figure 1 Figure 8 Figure 9Figure 10 Altitude resolved mid-IR transmission of H 2 O, CH 4 and CO 2 at Mauna Loa Anika Guha Atmospheric Chemistry Division,
Title slide Volcanic eruptions: their impact on sea level and oceanic heat content John A. Church 1,2 *, Neil J. White 1,2 and Julie M. Arblaster 3,4 1.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © Total Amount Altitude Optical Depth Longwave High Clouds Shortwave High Clouds Shortwave Low Clouds.
Simulation of the second half of the 20th Century using the MGO AGCM P.V. Sporyshev, V.P. Meleshko, T.V. Pavlova Voeikov Main Geophysical Observatory,
Apresentação de Resultados do IPCC AR4 WG1 Jose A. Marengo CPTEC/INPE.
Assessing trends in observed and modelled climate extremes over Australia in relation to future projections Extremes in a changing climate, KNMI, The Netherlands,
Global Warming Cause for Concern. Cause for Concern? What is the effect of increased levels of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere? Nobody knows.
Inter-comparison and Validation Task Team Breakout discussion.
Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years Thomas J. Crowley Presentation by Jessica L. Cruz April 26, 2001.
Comments on Discussion paper “Detecting, understanding, and attributing climate change” David Karoly School of Meteorology University of Oklahoma.
Use of CCSM3 and CAM3 Historical Runs: Estimation of Natural and Anthropogenic Climate Variability and Sensitivity Bruce T. Anderson, Boston University.
Projecting changes in climate and sea level Thomas Stocker Climate and Environmental Physics, Physics Institute, University of Bern Jonathan Gregory Walker.
Impacts of Aerosols on Climate Extremes in the USA Nora Mascioli.
C20C Workshop ICTP Trieste 2004 The Influence of the Ocean on the North Atlantic Climate Variability in C20C simulations with CSRIO AGCM Hodson.
© Crown copyright Met Office Regional Temperature and Precipitation changes under high- end global warming Michael Sanderson, Deborah Hemming, Richard.
IPCC WG1 AR5: Key Findings Relevant to Future Air Quality Fiona M. O’Connor, Atmospheric Composition & Climate Team, Met Office Hadley Centre.
C20C Workshop, ICTP Trieste 2004 The impact of stratospheric ozone depletion and CO 2 on tropical cyclone behaviour in the Australian region Syktus J.
Evaluation of climate models, Attribution of climate change IPCC Chpts 7,8 and 12. John F B Mitchell Hadley Centre How well do models simulate present.
1.Introduction Prediction of sea-ice is not only important for shipping but also for weather as it can have a significant climatic impact. Sea-ice predictions.
Research Needs for Decadal to Centennial Climate Prediction: From observations to modelling Julia Slingo, Met Office, Exeter, UK & V. Ramaswamy. GFDL,
Antarctic Climate Response to Ozone Depletion in a Fine Resolution Ocean Climate Mode by Cecilia Bitz 1 and Lorenzo Polvani 2 1 Atmospheric Sciences, University.
Page 1© Crown copyright 2004 The Hadley Centre The forcing of sea ice characteristics by the NAO in HadGEM1 UK Sea Ice Workshop, 9 September 2005 Chris.
COST 723 WORKSHOP – SOFIA, BULGARIA MAY 2006 USE OF RADIOSONDE DATA FOR VALIDATION OF REGIONAL CLIMATE MODELLING SIMULATIONS OVER CYPRUS Panos Hadjinicolaou.
Temporal Variability of Thermosteric & Halosteric Components of Sea Level Change, S. Levitus, J. Antonov, T. Boyer, R. Locarnini, H. Garcia,
The evolution of climate modeling Kevin Hennessy on behalf of CSIRO & the Bureau of Meteorology Tuesday 30 th September 2003 Canberra Short course & Climate.
Michael J. McPhaden NOAA/PMEL Seattle, Washington Decadal Variability and Trends in Tropical Pacific SST and Their Relation to the Shallow Meridional Overturning.
Based on data to 2000, 20 years of additional data could halve uncertainty in future warming © Crown copyright Met Office Stott and Kettleborough, 2002.
This study compares the Climate System Forecast Reanalysis (CFSR) tropospheric analyses to two ensembles of analyses. The first ensemble consists of 12.
Assessing the Influence of Decadal Climate Variability and Climate Change on Snowpacks in the Pacific Northwest JISAO/SMA Climate Impacts Group and the.
1 MET 112 Global Climate Change MET 112 Global Climate Change - Lecture 12 Future Predictions Eugene Cordero San Jose State University Outline  Scenarios.
Comparison of updated SSU temperatures with chemistry climate model simulations Nathan Gillett Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis, Victoria,
Michael J. McPhaden & Dongxiao Zhang NOAA/PMEL Decadal Variability and Trends of the Pacific Shallow Meridional Overturning Circulation and Their Relation.
Figure 1 Figure 8 Figure 9Figure 10 Altitude resolved mid-IR transmission of H 2 O, CH 4 and CO 2 at Mauna Loa Anika Guha Atmospheric Chemistry Division,
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE TEACHERS’ CONFERENCE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE TEACHERS’ CONFERENCE, Borki Molo, Poland, 7-10 February 2007 The warming trend for the.
Schematic framework of anthropogenic climate change drivers, impacts and responses to climate change, and their linkages (IPCC, 2007).
IPCC First Assessment Report 1990 IPCC Second Assessment Report: Climate Change 1995 IPCC Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001 IPCC Fourth Assessment.
Climate Change Climate change scenarios of the
Mid Term II Review.
A sensitivity study of the sea ice simulation in the global coupled climate model, HadGEM3 Jamie Rae, Helene Hewitt, Ann Keen, Jeff Ridley, John Edwards,
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
IPCC Working Group I Chapter 1 FINAL FIGURES
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
Modeling the Atmos.-Ocean System
Case Studies in Decadal Climate Predictability
Liping Zhang, Thomas L. Delworth, Will Cooke, and Xiaosong Yang
Climate Change and Agriculture
Trends in Iowa Precipitation: Observed and Projected Future Trends
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
Presentation transcript:

Hadley Centre Evaluating modelled and observed trends and variability in ocean heat content Jonathan Gregory 1,2, Helene Banks 1, Peter Stott 1, Jason Lowe 1 (1) Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, Met Office, Bracknell, United Kingdom (2) Centre for Global Atmospheric Modelling, Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, United Kingdom Sampling in the World Ocean Database (WOD, Levitus et al., 1998) can be very sparse as figure 2 shows. Levitus et al. (2000) created almost globally complete data using interpolation methods (Levitus et al., 1994). For each month from 1941 to 1996 we have averaged the WOD observations onto the grid of the HadCM3 AOGCM, which is uniform in the horizontal with boxes of 1.25º  1.25º and has 20 layers in the vertical ranging from 10 m to 615 m thickness. Data coverage in the Northern Hemisphere (0-65ºN) on the HadCM3 grid reaches a maximum of 70% after 1970 in the upper 360 m. Coverage declines with increasing depth; below 1193 m it never exceeds 20%. In the Southern Hemisphere (0-65ºS) coverage never exceeds 40% even in the upper 360 m. Figure 2. Number of observations in the top model level from the WOD for How can we produce estimates of ocean heat content from sparsely and irregularly sampled temperature fields? Considering each layer individually there are two extreme alternatives: Representative averages: assume that the average temperature of sampled points in any layer is representative of the average over the whole volume of that layer. Zero anomalies: where temperature is not sampled assume that the temperature anomaly is zero and hence does not contribute to the heat content anomaly of that layer. Where data coverage is complete the two estimates will be exactly equal. In other cases the method of representative averages will give larger anomalies. More complex interpolation schemes such as those used by Levitus et al. (2000) should give intermediate results. Figure 3a shows the ocean heat content anomaly calculated from WOD over the top 360 m of the Northern Hemisphere 0-65ºN. After 1970 our two estimates are almost identical and in good agreement with Levitus because of adequate data coverage. Before 1970, they disagree about the sign of the anomaly. Extending the results down to 3000 m (Figure 3b) and to include the Southern Hemisphere 0-65ºS (Figures 3c and 3d) we find increasingly large differences, with substantial disagreement even after The discrepancies arise from poor data coverage. As expected, the Levitus timeseries lies between our two. The Levitus range in heat content for the upper 3000 m of the global ocean is around 20  J. With our two different processing methods we find a range of heat content of around 50  J for the representative averages and 6  J for the zero anomalies. Figure 3. Timeseries of five-year running-mean ocean heat content anomalies, with respect to the mean of , calculated by the methods of representative averages and zero anomalies, and compared with the Levitus estimates. Note different vertical scales. The interannual RMS deviation from a linear trend to the five-year running means for world ocean heat content above 3000 m for in the Levitus results is 5.35  J. In the HadCM3 control run it is 1.93  J, significantly less at the 1% level. It is important to explain the discrepancy because variability of the size exhibited by the Levitus timeseries would have a substantial influence on the heat balance of the climate system and the interannual variability of climate, possibly affecting the conclusions of climate change detection and attribution studies. For example, the Levitus timeseries shows an increase of 7.5  J from 1988 to 1994, corresponding to a heat flux averaged over the world of 0.7 W m -2, about half the size of the radiative forcing due to carbon dioxide. Figure 5 (a) The interannual standard deviation of detrended layer heat content as a function of layer number for HadCM3 and the Levitus anomalies. (b) The interannual standard deviation of detrended temperature. In both panels the shaded region indicates the sampling uncertainty obtained by taking a number of 50-year segments of the HadCM3 control simulation. Observational results have previously shown that ocean heat content has increased over the last fifty years. Models are generally able to reproduce the observed trend but not the substantial decadal variability seen in the observed timeseries, as shown for instance in figure 1 for the HadCM3 AOGCM (Gordon et al., 2000). If such variability occurs it is important that climate models should simulate it. We have analysed the variability as a function of depth in the Levitus timeseries and HadCM3 control, both detrended. We used a large number of portions of the control, each of the length of the Levitus timeseries, in order to evaluate the uncertainty in the estimate of the model variability. Figure 5a shows the variability in heat content as a function of layer. In the upper 50 m, the simulated and observed datasets agree rather well. Figure 5b shows that variability in the model generally declines monotonically with increasing depth, but in the Levitus dataset there are marked peaks in the approximate ranges m and m. Since the source of variability is at the surface, we find these subsurface maxima intriguing. Around 500 m Levitus has twice the variability of the model. Below 200 m, imposing the observed data mask for on the simulated data has a strong influence on the estimated variability, doubling it at some levels. This sensitivity to the data mask leads us to suggest that the sparseness of the observed data could have made a contribution to inflating the subsurface variability in the Levitus timeseries. Figure 4 shows that in the upper 360m of the Northern Hemisphere ocean (0-65ºN) we find that the model is able to reproduce both the trends and variability when HadCM3 includes both anthropogenic and natural forcings (ALL ensemble). While the trend is reproduced reasonably well in the ANTHRO ensemble, the variability appears to be underestimated. The GHG ensemble overestimates the overall observed warming whereas the NATURAL ensemble shows a slight decreasing trend in ocean heat content, although the enhanced variability seen in the ALL ensemble is also seen in this ensemble. Figure 1. World ocean heat content as estimated by Levitus et al. (2000, hereafter referred to as the “Levitus” results) and from the HadCM3 ensembles: GHG (greenhouse gases only), ANTHRO (greenhouse gases plus sulphate aerosols and tropospheric and stratospheric ozone changes), NATURAL (changes in solar output and stratospheric volcanic aerosols) and ALL (all the forcings included in ANTHRO and NATURAL). Solid lines show the mean of 4 ensemble members and the blue dashed lines show the values for individual members of the ALL ensemble. Figure 4. Heat content anomalies in the upper 360m of the Northern hemisphere ocean (0-65ºN) from Levitus (black lines) and from the four ensembles, with ensembles shown as dashed coloured lines and the ensemble mean as a solid line. References Gordon, C., C. Cooper, C. A. Senior, H. Banks, J. M. Gregory, T. C. Johns and J. F. B. Mitchell, The Simulation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports in a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments, Clmate Dyn, 16, , Levitus, S., and T. P. Boyer, World Ocean Atlas 1994, Volume4: Temperature, NOAA/ESDIS E/OC21, US Department of Commerce, Washington DC, 1994, 117pp. Levitus, S., T. P. Boyer, M. E. Conkright, T. O’Brien, J. Antonov, C. Stephens, L. Stathoplos, D. Johnson, and R. Gelfield, World Ocean Database 1998, no 18 in NOAA Atlas NESDIS, US Department of Commerce, Levitus,S., J. I. Antonov, T. P. Boyer, and C. Stephens, Warming of the world ocean, Sciemce, 287, , Conclusions When both natural and anthropogenic forcings are included, HadCM3 simulations and the World Ocean Database have similar trends in global ocean heat content anomalies, but variability in the latter is larger, having a strong subsurface peak around 500 m, which is not present in HadCM3 simulations. Observations of ocean temperature are sparse outside the Northern Hemisphere (0-65ºN) upper 360 m. Within this region with best data coverage, HadCM3 and Levitus have similar variability. Comparison of global ocean heat content with observational estimates has been used as a test of coupled climate models; we suggest that such comparisons should be applied with caution outside the well-observed region. We recommend that continuing subsurface ocean observations should be supported as it is only with sufficient data that we can begin to understand decadal variability in ocean heat content which could be as large as trends over the past 50 years.