COMBINE – Comprehensive Modelling of the Earth System for Better Climate Prediction and Projection

M. A. Giorgetta, Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, HamburgIS-ENES kick-off meeting, 30-31 March 2009

Call: FP7-ENV-2008-1, ENV.2008.1.1.4.1

Funding scheme: Collaborative project

Partners: 22

Duration: 48 months (plan: 01.05.2009 – 30.04.2013)

Status: in negotiation

EC sci. officer: Philippe Tulkens

Partners in COMBINE, and their involvement in IS_ENES

1 Coord. Max Planck Society / MPI-M

2 Met Office

3 CNRS

4 CMCC

5 MF - CNRM

6 KNMI

7 Univ. Bergen

8 Danish Met. Institute

9 ECMWF

10 ETH Zürich

11 Finnish Met. Institute

12 PBL

13 SMHI

14 Univ. Wageningen

15 Univ. Helsinki

16 CERFACS

17 UCL

18 Univ. Bristol

19 Univ. Kassel

20 Tech. Univ. Crete

21 Cyprus R&E Foundation

22 INPE

Selected key questions in climate research

Do internal modes of variability exist in the climate system that allow skillful climate prediction on decadal time scales? What is the nature of these modes? Initialization methods and data? In which regions does predictability exist? For which time scales is a prediction skillful? (5, 10, 20 years?)

What is the role of different processes and related feedbacks for climate sensitivity and climate change on the centennial time scale (until 2100 and longer)? Carbon and nitrogen cycles (and methane) Clouds aerosols and chemistry Stratospheric dynamics Cryosphere: sea ice and ice shields

How to develop new mitigation scenarios?F( impacts( climate change( RCP scenarios, feedbacks ) )

The project in a nutshell

New components (WP1-5)

(C1) Carbon and nitrogen cycle

(C2) Aerosols, clouds and chemistry

(C3) Stratosphere

(C4) Cryosphere

(C5) Initialisation

ESMs Differences

(E1) ESM DΑ(C(i)) = (E2) – (E1)

(E2) ESM + C(i) DΩ(C(i)) = (E4) – (E3)

(E3) newESM – C(i) DΣ(ΣjC(j)) = (E4) – (E1)

(E4) newESM

Centennial Simulation (WP6)

(CS1) Pre-industrial control

(CS2) 20th century

(CS3) 21st century scenario (RPCs)

(CS4) +1% CO2 / year to 4xCO2

ESMs

(M1) COSMOS MPG

(M2) HadCM, HadGEM METO

(M3) IPSL-ESM CNRS

(M4) CMCC CMCC

(M5) CNRM-CM MF-CNRM

(M6) EC-EARTH EC-Earth cons.

(M7) NORCLIM UiB

Decadal Simulation (WP7)

(DS1) Climate prediction (2005-2035)

(DS2) Climate hindcasts

Impacts, and scenarios (WP8)

Impacts in sectors and regions

Scenarios

Obs. and re-analyses

CM

IP5

Example: Exploring CMIP5 expts in ENSEMBLES

Method proposed for the future CMIP5 experiments, i.e. experiments for the 5th IPCC assessment of climate change (Hibbard et al., 2007):

ConcentrationsSurface temperatureEmissions

2B 1 2A

Carbon cycle - climate model

Impacts in regions and sectorsStory lines

(Mitigation) Scenario

E1 scenario (Van Vuuren et al., 2007)

Equivalent CO2 concentration stabilizes at 450 ppm

Sulfate aerosol decreases quickly near pre-industrial levels at 2100 less cooling in early 21st cent.

Land use change consistent with assumptions in the IMAGE model

200

400

600

800

1000

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

CO2

CH4

N2O

CFC-11*

CFC-12

Well mixed greenhouse gases as prescribed in the E1 scenario.:

[ppm]

[ppb] -1000 ppb

[ppb]

[ppt]

[ppt]

CFC-11* includes the radiative forcingfrom all minor CFCs.

CO2 [ppmv]

2050 2100

SRES A2 522 836

SRES A1B 522 703

SRES B1 482 540

Ens. E1 435 421

Global surface air temperature anomalies

Initially stronger warming in E1 than in A1B because of faster reduction in sulfate aerosol loading, hence less cooling.

Reduce warming in E1 after 2040 Warming in 2100: ~4°C in A1B and ~2°C in E1

Climate – carbon cycle feedback will differ after 2050

Historic 1950-2000

A1B 2001 – 2100

E1 2001 – 2100

Global annual mean surface air temperature anomalies w.r.t. 1860-1880 (°C)

ECHAM5/MPIOM incl.carbon cycle

Implied CO2 emissions 1950 to 2100

Implied CO2 emissions of E1 scenario drop sharply after ~2015 (unlike emissions for A1B scenario)

Implied emissions are reduced by climate - carbon cycle feedback2100: -2 GtC/yr in E1 and -4.5 GtC/yr in A1B

Implied emissions of E1 close to 0 in 2100 (still positive).

Historic 1950 – 2000

A1B 2001 – 2100

E1 2001 – 2100

Implied CO2 emissions with and without climate – carbon cycle feedback (GtC/yr)

without feedback

with feedback

ECHAM5/MPIOM incl.carbon cycle

Summary

In COMBINE we hope to make some interesting science w.r.t. The role of different processes for feedbacks that regulate

climate change Predictability on the decadal time scale related to the internal

variability of the climate system and initialization techniques Impacts in sectors and regions for RCP scenarios Iterative improvement of mitigation scenarios.

And we hope for a fruitful interaction with IS-ENES: Infrastructure support in archiving, and dissemination of large

data sets for the full project lifetime (CMIP5 and beyond) Generally more transparent supercomputing and data

processing infrastructure at the European and international level.

Thank you

COMBINE & IPCC-AR5 time lines

Work packages and PIs

New components

(WP1) C and N cycle Pierre Friedlingstein (CNRS)Chris Jones (METO)

(WP2) Clouds, aerosols, and chemistry Ulrike Lohmann (ETH)Heikki Järvinen (FMI)

(WP3) Stratosphere Elisa Manzini (CMCC)Neal Butchart (METO)

(WP4) Cryosphere Shuting Yang (DMI)Masa Kageyama (CNRS)

(WP5) Initialisation Doug Smith (Doug Smith)Magdalena Balmaseda (ECMWF)

CMIP5/AR5 + Evaluation

(WP6) Decadal climate prediction Rein Haarsma (KNMI), Silvio Gualdi (CMCC)

(WP7) Climate projections and feedbacks

Christoph Heinze (UiB), Johannes Quaas (MPG)

(WP8) Impacts, regional feedbacks and Scenarios

Pavel Kabat (WU)Daniela Jacob (MPG)Detlef van Vuuren (PBL)

Text of call FP7-ENV-2008-1

Area 6.1.1.4. Future Climate

ENV.2008.1.1.4.1. New components in Earth System modelling for better climate projectionsFuture climate predictions necessitate development of models which incorporate more complete range of Earth System parameters in comparison to the existing ones, as well as the Earth System feedbacks on future climate change. Incorporation of Earth system components (e.g., chemistry, stratosphere, nitrogen cycle, aerosols and ozone, cryosphere, ocean biochemistry and carbon sink, human dimension) within climate models and applications of these to a number of case studies (e.g. decadal-timescale prediction). Implications of these feedbacks for impacts of climate change on different sectors (e.g. water resources, agriculture, forestry, air quality) through specific simulations.

Expected impact: The project outcome should contribute to the 5th IPCC assessment on climate change and provide solid scientific basis for future policy actions at European and international level …

Pert diagram

Motivation for this study

United Nations Framework on Climate Change: Article 2:

‘The ultimate objective of this Convention ... is to achieve, ..., stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.’

Questions relevant for IPCC AR5 What anthropogenic CO2 emissions are feasible for a CO2 conc. pathway? Were are anthrop. carbon emissions stored in the system? What is the resulting climate change for a given CO2 pathway? What is the role of feedbacks between climate change and the C cycle:

for climate change? for feasible carbon emissions?

CMIP5 protocol provides description of experiments for the investigation of these questions in a coordinated multi model ensemble.

European ENSEMBLES project: Mitigation scenario E1 (Van Vuuren et al., 2007).

Stabilize the anthropogenic radiative forcing to that equivalent to a CO2 concentration at around 450 ppm during the 22nd century.

To match the European Union 2°C target. Apply E1 scenario and CMIP5 experiments to address questions listed above

Pre-industrial control simulation

Climate of undisturbed system stable over 1000 years,no systematic drift in surface air temperature or CO2 concentration

Surface air temperature(left scale, °C)

Atmospheric CO2 concentration (right scale, ppmv)

Global annual mean surface air temperature (°C) and CO2 concentration (ppmv) Pre-industrial conditions, thick lines: 11-year running means

Global annual mean surface air temperature

Simulated surface air temperature less variable than observed. Natural sources of variability like volcanic forcing or the 11 year

solar cycle are excluded from the experiment. Simulated warming in 2005 slightly underestimated.

Global annual mean surface air temperature anomalies w.r.t. 1860-1880 (°C)5 year running means

simulated (5 realizations)

observed (Brohan et al., 2006)

Global annual mean CO2 emissions 1860 to 2005

Model allows for relatively higher emissions before 1930. Minimum in 1940s Similar emissions in 2000.

Implied emissions from simulations

Observed (Marland et al., 2006)

CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (GtC/yr)Global annual mean; 11-year running means

Carbon release and uptake by land, 1860 – 2005

Simulated land use emissions smaller than observed, especially in 1960-2000

Simulated land uptake sationary from 1920 to 1960.

Observed land-use emissions (Houghton, 2008)

Simulated land-use emissions

Simulated net land uptake

Simulated land uptake

Carbon release from land use emissions and uptake by land (GtC/yr), Positive = land-to-atmosphere flux; Model: 11-year running means,

Simulated carbon uptake 1860 to 2005

Ocean carbon uptake very similar to land uptake Reduced uptake in 1950s

Simulated carbon uptake (GtC/yr)11-year running means

Simulated ocean uptake

Simulated land uptake(as on previous figure)

Momentum, Energy, H2O, CO2

OceanMPIOM 3°L40

HAMOCC

LandHD

JSBACH

AtmosphereECHAM5 T31/L19

~4°

Solar variations

Volcanic aerosolCO2 emissions/conc.

Carbon cycle climate model

Natural forcingAnthropogenic forcing

Land use change

CH4, N2O, CFC conc.

Carbon cycle – climate model

X X

Experiments

E1 450 ppm

SRES A1B

1860 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100

Historic1860-2005

Control“1860”1000 yr

Ensembles of 5 realizations

Carbon uptake by ocean and land 1960-2000

50% of simulated fossil fuel emissons remain in the atmosphere In 2000: simulated ocean uptake = ~2 x simulated land uptake

Remaining in the atmosphere

Absorbed by ocean

Aborbed by land

Fraction of simulated fossil fuel emissions (%)

Accumulated C emissions: Coupled – Uncoupled

Climate – carbon cycle feedback reduces implied carbon emissions until 2100 by 180 (E1) to 280 (A1B) GtC.

Historic 1860 – 2000

A1B 2001 – 2100

E1 2001 – 2100

Reduction in accumulated C emissions by climate – carbon cycle coupling (GtC)(11-year running means)

Fig.12

Fig.13

Surface C uptake: Coupled – uncoupled

Regions with negative differences take up less carbon under global warming conditions and contribute to a positive feedback between climate and carbon cycle.

Stabilization scenario E1 (2080 to 2100)

IPCC SRES scenario A1B (2080 to 2100)

Table 1

Table 2