Relationship between Shortwave Cloud Radiative Forcing and Local Meteorological Variables Compared in Observations and Several Global Climate Models

Markus Stowasser International Pacific Research Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii

Search for other papers by Markus Stowasser in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
Kevin Hamilton International Pacific Research Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii

Search for other papers by Kevin Hamilton in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

The relations between local monthly mean shortwave cloud radiative forcing and aspects of the resolved-scale meteorological fields are investigated in hindcast simulations performed with 12 of the global coupled models included in the model intercomparison conducted as part of the preparation for Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). In particular, the connection of the cloud forcing over tropical and subtropical ocean areas with resolved midtropospheric vertical velocity and with lower-level relative humidity are investigated and compared among the models. The model results are also compared with observational determinations of the same relationships using satellite data for the cloud forcing and global reanalysis products for the vertical velocity and humidity fields. In the analysis the geographical variability in the long-term mean among all grid points and the interannual variability of the monthly mean at each grid point are considered separately. The shortwave cloud radiative feedback (SWCRF) plays a crucial role in determining the predicted response to large-scale climate forcing (such as from increased greenhouse gas concentrations), and it is thus important to test how the cloud representations in current climate models respond to unforced variability.

Overall there is considerable variation among the results for the various models, and all models show some substantial differences from the comparable observed results. The most notable deficiency is a weak representation of the cloud radiative response to variations in vertical velocity in cases of strong ascending or strong descending motions. While the models generally perform better in regimes with only modest upward or downward motions, even in these regimes there is considerable variation among the models in the dependence of SWCRF on vertical velocity. The largest differences between models and observations when SWCRF values are stratified by relative humidity are found in either very moist or very dry regimes. Thus, the largest errors in the model simulations of cloud forcing are prone to be in the western Pacific warm pool area, which is characterized by very moist strong upward currents, and in the rather dry regions where the flow is dominated by descending mean motions.

Corresponding author address: M. Stowasser, IPRC/SOEST, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1680 East–West Rd., Post Bldg. 401, Honolulu, HI 96822. Email: stowasse@hawaii.edu

Abstract

The relations between local monthly mean shortwave cloud radiative forcing and aspects of the resolved-scale meteorological fields are investigated in hindcast simulations performed with 12 of the global coupled models included in the model intercomparison conducted as part of the preparation for Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). In particular, the connection of the cloud forcing over tropical and subtropical ocean areas with resolved midtropospheric vertical velocity and with lower-level relative humidity are investigated and compared among the models. The model results are also compared with observational determinations of the same relationships using satellite data for the cloud forcing and global reanalysis products for the vertical velocity and humidity fields. In the analysis the geographical variability in the long-term mean among all grid points and the interannual variability of the monthly mean at each grid point are considered separately. The shortwave cloud radiative feedback (SWCRF) plays a crucial role in determining the predicted response to large-scale climate forcing (such as from increased greenhouse gas concentrations), and it is thus important to test how the cloud representations in current climate models respond to unforced variability.

Overall there is considerable variation among the results for the various models, and all models show some substantial differences from the comparable observed results. The most notable deficiency is a weak representation of the cloud radiative response to variations in vertical velocity in cases of strong ascending or strong descending motions. While the models generally perform better in regimes with only modest upward or downward motions, even in these regimes there is considerable variation among the models in the dependence of SWCRF on vertical velocity. The largest differences between models and observations when SWCRF values are stratified by relative humidity are found in either very moist or very dry regimes. Thus, the largest errors in the model simulations of cloud forcing are prone to be in the western Pacific warm pool area, which is characterized by very moist strong upward currents, and in the rather dry regions where the flow is dominated by descending mean motions.

Corresponding author address: M. Stowasser, IPRC/SOEST, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1680 East–West Rd., Post Bldg. 401, Honolulu, HI 96822. Email: stowasse@hawaii.edu

Save
  • Barkstrom, B. R., 1984: The earth radiation budget experiment (ERBE). Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 65 , 1170–1185.

  • Barkstrom, B. R., E. Harrison, G. Smith, R. Green, J. Kibler, and R. Cess, 1989: Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE) archival and April 1985 results. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 70 , 1254–1262.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bony, S., and K. A. Emanuel, 2001: A parameterization of the cloudiness associated with cumulus convection; evaluation using TOGA COARE data. J. Atmos. Sci., 58 , 3158–3183.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bony, S., K-M. Lau, and Y. C. Sud, 1997: Sea surface temperature and large-scale circulation influences on tropical greenhouse effect and cloud radiative forcing. J. Climate, 10 , 2055–2077.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bony, S., J-L. Dufresne, H. Le Treut, J-J. Morcrette, and C. Senior, 2004: On dynamic and thermodynamic components of cloud changes. Climate Dyn., 22 , 71–86.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cess, R. D., and Coauthors, 1996: Cloud feedback in atmospheric general circulation models: An update. J. Geophys. Res., 101 , 12791–12794.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Coakley, J. A., and D. G. Baldwin, 1984: Towards the objective analysis of clouds from imagery data. J. Climate Appl. Meteor., 23 , 1065–1099.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Collins, W. D., and Coauthors, 2006: The Community Climate System Model version 3 (CCSM3). J. Climate, 19 , 2122–2143.

  • Del Genio, A. D., and W. Kovari, 2002: Climatic properties of tropical precipitating convection under varying environmental conditions. J. Climate, 15 , 2597–2615.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Delworth, T. L., 2006: GFDL’s CM2 global coupled climate models. Part I: Formulation and simulation characteristics. J. Climate, 19 , 643–674.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Diansky, N. A., and E. M. Volodin, 2002: Simulation of present-day climate with a coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation model. Izv. Atmos. Ocean Phys., 38 , 732–747.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Harrison, E. F., P. M. Minnis, B. R. Barkstrom, V. Ramanathan, R. D. Cess, and G. G. Gibson, 1990: Seasonal variation of cloud radiative forcing derived from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment. J. Geophys. Res., 95 , 18687–18703.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hartmann, D. L., and K. Larson, 2002: An important constraint on tropical cloud-climate feedback. Geophys. Res. Lett., 29 .1951, doi:10.1029/2002GL015835.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Houghton, J. T., Y. Ding, D. J. Griggs, M. Noguer, P. J. van der Linden, and D. Xiaosu, and Eds., 2001: Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Cambridge University Press, 944 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kalnay, E., and Coauthors, 1996: The NCEP/NCAR 40-Year Reanalysis Project. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 77 , 437–471.

  • Lin, B., B. A. Wielicki, L. H. Chambers, Y. Hu, and K. Xu, 2002: The seasonal cycle of low stratiform clouds. J. Climate, 15 , 3–7.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lindzen, R. S., M. Chou, and A. Hou, 2001: Does the earth have an adaptive infrared iris? Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 82 , 417–432.

  • Loeb, N. G., K. Loukachine, N. Manalo-Smith, B. A. Wielicki, and D. F. Young, 2003: Angular distribution models for top-of-atmosphere radiative flux estimation from the Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System instrument on the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission Satellite. Part II: Validation. J. Appl. Meteor., 42 , 1748–1769.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Norris, J. R., and C. P. Weaver, 2001: Improved techniques for evaluating GCM cloudiness applied to the NCAR CCM3. J. Climate, 14 , 2540–2550.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schmidt, G. A., and Coauthors, 2006: Present-day atmospheric simulations using GISS ModelE: Comparison to in situ, satellite, and reanalysis data. J. Climate, 19 , 153–192.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Senior, C. A., 1999: Comparison of mechanisms of cloud-climate feedbacks in GCMs. J. Climate, 12 , 1480–1489.

  • Simmons, A. J., and J. K. Gibson, 2000: The ERA-40 Project Plan. ERA-40 Project Rep. Series 1, European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom, 63 pp.

  • Stowasser, M., K. Hamilton, and G. J. Boer, 2006: Local and global climate feedbacks in models with differing climate sensitivities. J. Climate, 19 , 193–209.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Trenberth, K. E., and C. Guillemot, 1995: Evaluation of the global atmospheric moisture budget as seen from analyses. J. Climate, 8 , 2255–2272.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Trenberth, K. E., and C. Guillemot, 1998: Evaluation of the atmospheric moisture and hydrological cycle in the NCEP/NCAR reanalyses. Climate Dyn., 14 , 213–231.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wilks, D. S., 1995: Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences. Academic Press, 467 pp.

  • Williams, K. D., M. A. Ringer, and C. A. Senior, 2003: Evaluating the cloud response to climate change and current climate variability. Climate Dyn., 20 , 705–721.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Yao, M. S., and A. D. Del Genio, 1999: Effects of cloud parameterization on the simulation of climate changes in the GISS GCM. J. Climate, 12 , 761–779.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Yongqiang, Y., Z. Xuehong, and G. Yufu, 2004: Global coupled ocean-atmosphere general circulation models in LASG/IAP. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 21 , 444–455.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 2067 471 46
PDF Downloads 279 46 0