Understanding Land–Sea Warming Contrast in Response to Increasing Greenhouse Gases. Part I: Transient Adjustment

Buwen Dong National Centre for Atmospheric Science, Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by Buwen Dong in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Jonathan M. Gregory National Centre for Atmospheric Science, Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, and Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by Jonathan M. Gregory in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Rowan T. Sutton National Centre for Atmospheric Science, Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by Rowan T. Sutton in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

Climate model simulations consistently show that surface temperature over land increases more rapidly than over sea in response to greenhouse gas forcing. The enhanced warming over land is not simply a transient effect caused by the land–sea contrast in heat capacities, since it is also present in equilibrium conditions. This paper elucidates the transient adjustment processes over time scales of days to weeks of the surface and tropospheric climate in response to a doubling of CO2 and to changes in sea surface temperature (SST), imposed separately and together, using ensembles of experiments with an atmospheric general circulation model. These adjustment processes can be grouped into three stages: immediate response of the troposphere and surface processes (day 1), fast adjustment of surface processes (days 2–5), and adjustment of the whole troposphere (days 6–20).

Some land surface warming in response to doubled CO2 (with unchanged SSTs) occurs immediately because of increased downward longwave radiation. Increased CO2 also leads to reduced plant stomatal resistance and hence restricted evaporation, which increases land surface warming in the first day. Rapid reductions in cloud amount lead in the next few days to increased downward shortwave radiation and further warming, which spreads upward from the surface, and by day 5 the surface and tropospheric response is statistically consistent with the equilibrium value. Land surface warming in response to imposed SST change (with unchanged CO2) is slower. Tropospheric warming is advected inland from the sea, and over land it occurs at all levels together rather than spreading upward from the surface. The atmospheric response to prescribed SST change in about 20 days is statistically consistent with the equilibrium value, and the warming is largest in the upper troposphere over both land and sea. The land surface warming involves reduction of cloud cover and increased downward shortwave radiation, as in the experiment with CO2 change, but in this case it is due to the restriction of moisture supply to the land (indicated by reduced soil moisture), whereas in the CO2 forcing experiment it is due to restricted evaporation despite increased moisture supply (indicated by increased soil moisture). The warming over land in response to SST change is greater than over the sea and is the dominant contribution to the land–sea warming contrast under enhanced CO2 forcing.

Corresponding author address: Buwen Dong, National Centre for Atmospheric Science, Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6BB, United Kingdom. Email: b.dong@reading.ac.uk

Abstract

Climate model simulations consistently show that surface temperature over land increases more rapidly than over sea in response to greenhouse gas forcing. The enhanced warming over land is not simply a transient effect caused by the land–sea contrast in heat capacities, since it is also present in equilibrium conditions. This paper elucidates the transient adjustment processes over time scales of days to weeks of the surface and tropospheric climate in response to a doubling of CO2 and to changes in sea surface temperature (SST), imposed separately and together, using ensembles of experiments with an atmospheric general circulation model. These adjustment processes can be grouped into three stages: immediate response of the troposphere and surface processes (day 1), fast adjustment of surface processes (days 2–5), and adjustment of the whole troposphere (days 6–20).

Some land surface warming in response to doubled CO2 (with unchanged SSTs) occurs immediately because of increased downward longwave radiation. Increased CO2 also leads to reduced plant stomatal resistance and hence restricted evaporation, which increases land surface warming in the first day. Rapid reductions in cloud amount lead in the next few days to increased downward shortwave radiation and further warming, which spreads upward from the surface, and by day 5 the surface and tropospheric response is statistically consistent with the equilibrium value. Land surface warming in response to imposed SST change (with unchanged CO2) is slower. Tropospheric warming is advected inland from the sea, and over land it occurs at all levels together rather than spreading upward from the surface. The atmospheric response to prescribed SST change in about 20 days is statistically consistent with the equilibrium value, and the warming is largest in the upper troposphere over both land and sea. The land surface warming involves reduction of cloud cover and increased downward shortwave radiation, as in the experiment with CO2 change, but in this case it is due to the restriction of moisture supply to the land (indicated by reduced soil moisture), whereas in the CO2 forcing experiment it is due to restricted evaporation despite increased moisture supply (indicated by increased soil moisture). The warming over land in response to SST change is greater than over the sea and is the dominant contribution to the land–sea warming contrast under enhanced CO2 forcing.

Corresponding author address: Buwen Dong, National Centre for Atmospheric Science, Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6BB, United Kingdom. Email: b.dong@reading.ac.uk

Save
  • Allen, M. R., and W. J. Ingram, 2002: Constraints on future changes in climate and the hydrologic cycle. Nature, 419 , 224232.

  • Andrews, T., and P. M. Forster, 2008: CO2 forcing induces semi-direct effects with consequences for climate feedback interpretations. Geophys. Res. Lett., 35 , L04802. doi:10.1029/2007GL032273.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Andrews, T., P. M. Forster, and J. M. Gregory, 2009: A surface energy perspective on climate change. J. Climate, 22 , 25572570.

  • Cash, B. A., E. K. Schneider, and L. Bengtsson, 2005: Origin of regional climate differences: Role of boundary conditions and model formulation in two GCMs. Climate Dyn., 25 , 709723. doi:10.1007/s00382-005-0069-5.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chiang, J. C. H., and B. R. Lintner, 2005: Mechanisms of remote tropical surface warming during El Niño. J. Climate, 18 , 41304149.

  • Compo, G. P., and P. D. Sardeshmukh, 2008: Oceanic influences on recent continental warming. Climate Dyn., 32 , 333342. doi:10.1007/s00382-008-0448-9.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cox, P. M., R. A. Betts, C. B. Bunton, R. L. H. Essery, P. R. Rowntree, and J. Smith, 1999: The impact of new land surface physics on the GCM simulation of climate and climate sensitivity. Climate Dyn., 15 , 183203.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cubasch, U., and Coauthors, 2001: Projections of future climate change. Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, J. T. Houghton et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press, 525–582.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cusack, S., J. M. Edward, and J. M. Crowther, 1999: Investigating k-distribution methods for parametrizing gaseous absorption in the Hadley Centre climate model. J. Geophys. Res., 104 , 20512057.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Deser, C., and A. S. Phillips, 2009: Atmospheric circulation trends, 1950–2000: The relative roles of sea surface temperature forcing and direct atmospheric radiative forcing. J. Climate, 22 , 396419.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dommenget, D., 2009: The ocean’s role in continental climate variability and change. J. Climate, in press.

  • Edwards, J. M., and A. Slingo, 1996: Studies with a flexible new radiation code. I: Choosing a configuration for a large-scale model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 122 , 689719.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gregory, J. M., and M. J. Webb, 2008: Tropospheric adjustment induces a cloud component in CO2 forcing. J. Climate, 21 , 5871.

  • Hansen, J., I. Fung, A. Lacis, D. Rind, S. Lebedeff, R. Ruedy, G. Russell, and P. Stone, 1988: Global climate changes as forecast by Goddard Institute for Space Studies three-dimensional model. J. Geophys. Res., 93 , (D8). 93419364.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Held, I. M., and B. J. Soden, 2006: Robust responses of the hydrological cycle to global warming. J. Climate, 19 , 56865699.

  • Joshi, M., J. Gregory, M. Webb, D. Sexton, and T. Johns, 2008: Mechanisms for the land/sea warming contrast exhibited by simulations of climate change. Climate Dyn., 30 , 455465. doi:10.1007/s00382-007-0306-1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kumar, A., F. Yang, L. Goddard, and S. Schubert, 2004: Differing trends in the tropical surface temperatures and precipitation over land and oceans. J. Climate, 17 , 653664.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lambert, F. H., and J. C. H. Chiang, 2007: Control of land–ocean temperature contrast by ocean heat uptake. Geophys. Res. Lett., 34 , L13704. doi:10.1029/2007GL029755.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lambert, F. H., and M. J. Webb, 2008: Dependency of global mean precipitation on surface temperature. Geophys. Res. Lett., 35 , L16706. doi:10.1029/2008GL034838.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Manabe, S., and R. T. Wetherald, 1975: The effects of doubling the CO2 concentration on the climate of a general circulation model. J. Atmos. Sci., 32 , 315.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Manabe, S., and R. J. Stouffer, 1980: Sensitivity of a global climate model to an increase of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. J. Geophys. Res., 85 , (C10). 55295554.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Manabe, S., R. J. Stouffer, M. Spelman, and K. Bryan, 1991: Transient responses of a coupled ocean–atmosphere model to gradual changes of atmospheric CO2. Part I: Annual mean response. J. Climate, 4 , 785818.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Meehl, G. A., and Coauthors, 2007: Global climate projections. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, S. Solomon et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press, 749–844.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Murphy, J., and J. Mitchell, 1995: Transient response of the Hadley Centre coupled ocean–atmosphere model to increasing carbon dioxide. Part II: Spatial and temporal structure of response. J. Climate, 8 , 5780.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pope, V. D., M. Gallani, P. R. Rowntree, and R. A. Stratton, 2000: The impact of new physical parametrizations in the Hadley Centre climate model: HadAM3. Climate Dyn., 16 , 123146.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rayner, N. A., D. E. Parker, E. B. Horton, C. K. Folland, L. V. Alexander, D. P. Rowell, E. C. Kent, and A. Kaplan, 2003: Global analyses of sea surface temperature, sea ice, and night marine air temperature since the late nineteenth century. J. Geophys. Res., 108 , 4407. doi:10.1029/2002JD002670.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sexton, D. M. H., H. Grubb, K. P. Shine, and C. K. Folland, 2003: Design and analysis of climate model experiments for the efficient estimation of anthropogenic signals. J. Climate, 16 , 13201336.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Shine, K. P., and Coauthors, 2003: A comparison of model-simulated trends in stratospheric temperatures. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 129 , 15651588.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sobel, A. H., I. M. Held, and C. S. Bretherton, 2002: The ENSO signal in tropical tropospheric temperature. J. Climate, 15 , 27022706.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stouffer, R. J., and S. Manabe, 1999: Response of a coupled ocean–atmosphere model to increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide: Sensitivity to the rate of increase. J. Climate, 12 , 22242237.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sutton, R. T., B-W. Dong, and J. M. Gregory, 2007: Land/sea warming ratio in response to climate change: IPCC AR4 model results and comparison with observations. Geophys. Res. Lett., 34 , L02701. doi:10.1029/2006GL028164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wang, H., and K-M. Lau, 2006: Atmospheric hydrological cycle in the tropics in twentieth century coupled climate simulations. Int. J. Climatol., 26 , 655678.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Yang, F., A. Kumar, M. E. Schlesinger, and W. Wang, 2003: Intensity of hydrological cycles in warmer climates. J. Climate, 16 , 24192423.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1594 668 36
PDF Downloads 761 214 17