• Adcroft, A., and J. M. Campin, 2004: Rescaled height coordinates for accurate representation of free-surface flows in ocean circulation models. Ocean Modell., 7 , 269284.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Alley, R. B., and Coauthors, 2003: Abrupt climate change. Science, 299 , 20052010.

  • Bryan, K., 1969: A numerical method for the study of the circulation of the World Ocean. J. Comput. Phys., 4 , 347376.

  • Delworth, T., and Coauthors, 2006: GFDL’s CM2 global coupled climate models. Part I: Formulation and simulation characteristics. J. Climate, 19 , 643674.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dong, B., and R. T. Sutton, 2007: Enhancement of ENSO variability by a weakened Atlantic thermohaline circulation in a coupled GCM. J. Climate, 20 , 49204939.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • GFDL Global Atmospheric Model Development Team, 2004: The new GFDL global atmosphere and land model AM2–LM2: Evaluation with prescribed SST simulations. J. Climate, 17 , 46414673.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gnanadesikan, A., and Coauthors, 2006: GFDL’s CM2 global coupled climate models. Part II: The baseline ocean simulation. J. Climate, 19 , 675697.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Goldsbrough, G. R., 1933: Ocean currents produced by evaporation and precipitation. Proc. Roy. Soc. London, 141A , 512517.

  • Gordon, C., C. Cooper, C. A. Senior, H. T. Banks, J. M. Gregory, T. C. Johns, J. F. B. Mitchell, and R. A. Wood, 2000: The simulation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports in a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments. Climate Dyn., 16 , 147168.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffies, S. M., 2008: Elements of mom4p1. GFDL Ocean Group Tech. Rep., NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Rep. 6, 385 pp.

  • Griffies, S. M., R. C. Pacanowski, M. Schmidt, and V. Balaji, 2001: Tracer conservation with an explicit free surface method for z-coordinate ocean models. Mon. Wea. Rev., 129 , 10811098.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffies, S. M., M. J. Harrison, R. C. Pacanowski, and A. Rosati, 2003: A technical guide to MOM4. GFDL Ocean Group Tech. Rep. 5, NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, 295 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffies, S. M., and Coauthors, 2005: Formulation of an ocean model for global climate simulations. Ocean Sci., 1 , 4579.

  • Huang, R. X., 1993: Real freshwater flux as a natural boundary condition for the salinity balance and thermohaline circulation forced by evaporation and precipitation. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 23 , 24282446.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Huang, R. X., and R. W. Schmitt, 1993: The Goldsbrough–Stommel circulation of the world oceans. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 23 , 12771284.

  • Johns, T. C., and Coauthors, 2006: The new Hadley Centre climate model (HadGEM1): Evaluation of coupled simulations. J. Climate, 19 , 13271353.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Knutti, R., and T. F. Stocker, 2000: Influence of the thermohaline circulation on projected sea level rise. J. Climate, 13 , 19972001.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Levermann, A., A. Griesel, M. Hofmann, M. Montoya, and S. Rahmstorf, 2005: Dynamic sea level changes following changes in the thermohaline circulation. Climate Dyn., 24 , 347354.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Manabe, S., and K. Bryan, 1969: Climate calculations with a combined ocean–atmosphere model. J. Atmos. Sci., 26 , 786789.

  • Manabe, S., and R. T. Wetherald, 1975: The effects of doubling 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, 1988: Two stable equilibria of a coupled ocean–atmosphere model. J. Climate, 1 , 841866.

  • Meehl, G. A., and Coauthors, 2007: Global climate projections. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, S. Solomon et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press, 747–846.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mignot, J., A. Ganopolski, and A. Levermann, 2007: Atlantic subsurface temperature: Response to a shutdown of the overturning circulation and consequences for its recovery. J. Climate, 20 , 48844898.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mitrovica, J. X., N. Gomez, and P. U. Clark, 2009: The sea-level fingerprint of west Antarctic collapse. Science, 323 , 753.

  • Randall, D. A., and Coauthors, 2007: Climate models and their evaluation. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, S. Solomon et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press, 589–662.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Smith, R., and P. Gent, 2004: Reference manual for the Parallel Ocean Program (POP) ocean component of the Community Climate System Model (CCSM2.0 and 3.0). Tech. Rep. LAUR-02-2484, LANL, 75 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stacey, M. W., S. Pond, and Z. P. Nowak, 1995: A numerical model of the circulation in Knight Inlet, British Columbia, Canada. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 25 , 10371062.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stammer, D., 2008: Response of the global ocean to Greenland and Antarctic ice melting. J. Geophys. Res., 113 , C06022. doi:10.1029/2006JC004079.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stocker, T. F., and C. C. Raible, 2005: Water cycle shifts gear. Nature, 434 , 830833.

  • Stommel, H., 1957: A survey of ocean current theory. Deep-Sea Res., 4 , 149184.

  • Stouffer, R. J., 2004: Time scales of climate response. J. Climate, 17 , 209217.

  • Stouffer, R. J., and Coauthors, 2006a: Investigating the causes of the response of the thermohaline circulation to past and future climate changes. J. Climate, 19 , 13651387.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stouffer, R. J., and Coauthors, 2006b: GFDL’s CM2 global coupled climate models. Part IV: Idealized climate response. J. Climate, 19 , 723740.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sun, S., and R. Bleck, 2006: Multi-century simulations with the coupled GISS–HYCOM climate model: Control experiments. Climate Dyn., 26 , 407428.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Timmermann, A., and Coauthors, 2007: The influence of a weakening of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation on ENSO. J. Climate, 20 , 48994919.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vellinga, M., and R. Wood, 2002: Global climatic impacts of a collapse of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation. Climatic Change, 54 , 251267.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Winton, M., 2000: A reformulated three-layer sea ice model. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 17 , 525531.

  • Wittenberg, A. T., 2009: Are historical records sufficient to constrain ENSO simulations? Geophys. Res. Lett., 36 , L12702. doi:10.1029/2009GL038710.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wittenberg, A. T., A. Rosati, N. C. Lau, and J. J. Ploshay, 2006: GFDL’s CM2 global coupled climate models. Part III: Tropical Pacific climate and ENSO. J. Climate, 19 , 698722.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wu, P., R. Wood, and P. Stott, 2005: Human influence on increasing Arctic river discharges. Geophys. Res. Lett., 32 , L02703. doi:10.1029/2004GL021570.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Yin, J., and R. J. Stouffer, 2007: Comparison of the stability of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation in two coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation models. J. Climate, 20 , 42934315.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Yin, J., M. E. Schlesinger, and R. J. Stouffer, 2009: Model projections of rapid sea-level rise on the northeast coast of the United States. Nat. Geosci., 2 , 262266. doi:10.1038/NGEO462.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zhang, R., and T. L. Delworth, 2005: Simulated tropical response to a substantial weakening of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation. J. Climate, 18 , 18531860.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 8 8 8
PDF Downloads 14 14 14

Evaluating the Uncertainty Induced by the Virtual Salt Flux Assumption in Climate Simulations and Future Projections

View More View Less
  • 1 Program in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
  • | 2 NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, New Jersey
Restricted access

Abstract

The unphysical virtual salt flux (VSF) formulation widely used in the ocean component of climate models has the potential to cause systematic and significant biases in modeling the climate system and projecting its future evolution. Here a freshwater flux (FWF) and a virtual salt flux version of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Climate Model version 2.1 (GFDL CM2.1) are used to evaluate and quantify the uncertainties induced by the VSF formulation. Both unforced and forced runs with the two model versions are performed and compared in detail. It is found that the differences between the two versions are generally small or statistically insignificant in the unforced control runs and in the runs with a small external forcing. In response to a large external forcing, however, some biases in the VSF version become significant, especially the responses of regional salinity and global sea level. However, many fundamental aspects of the responses differ only quantitatively between the two versions. An unexpected result is the distinctly different ENSO responses. Under a strong external freshwater forcing, the great enhancement of the ENSO variability simulated by the FWF version does not occur in the VSF version and is caused by the overexpansion of the top model layer. In summary, the principle assumption behind using virtual salt flux is not seriously violated and the VSF model has the ability to simulate the current climate and project near-term climate evolution. For some special studies such as a large hosing experiment, however, both the VSF formulation and the use of the FWF in the geopotential coordinate ocean model could have some deficiencies and one should be cautious to avoid them.

* Current affiliation: COAPS, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.

Corresponding author address: Jianjun Yin, COAPS, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32311. Email: yin@coaps.fsu.edu

Abstract

The unphysical virtual salt flux (VSF) formulation widely used in the ocean component of climate models has the potential to cause systematic and significant biases in modeling the climate system and projecting its future evolution. Here a freshwater flux (FWF) and a virtual salt flux version of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Climate Model version 2.1 (GFDL CM2.1) are used to evaluate and quantify the uncertainties induced by the VSF formulation. Both unforced and forced runs with the two model versions are performed and compared in detail. It is found that the differences between the two versions are generally small or statistically insignificant in the unforced control runs and in the runs with a small external forcing. In response to a large external forcing, however, some biases in the VSF version become significant, especially the responses of regional salinity and global sea level. However, many fundamental aspects of the responses differ only quantitatively between the two versions. An unexpected result is the distinctly different ENSO responses. Under a strong external freshwater forcing, the great enhancement of the ENSO variability simulated by the FWF version does not occur in the VSF version and is caused by the overexpansion of the top model layer. In summary, the principle assumption behind using virtual salt flux is not seriously violated and the VSF model has the ability to simulate the current climate and project near-term climate evolution. For some special studies such as a large hosing experiment, however, both the VSF formulation and the use of the FWF in the geopotential coordinate ocean model could have some deficiencies and one should be cautious to avoid them.

* Current affiliation: COAPS, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.

Corresponding author address: Jianjun Yin, COAPS, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32311. Email: yin@coaps.fsu.edu

Save