Differences in radiative forcing, not sensitivity, explain differences in summertime land temperature variance change between CMIP5 and CMIP6
Differences in radiative forcing, not sensitivity, explain differences in summertime land temperature variance change between CMIP5 and CMIP6
How summertime temperature variability will change with warming has important implications for climate adaptation and mitigation. CMIP5 simulations indicate a compound risk of extreme hot temperatures in western Europe from both warming and increasing temperature variance. CMIP6 simulations, however, indicate only a moderate increase in temperature variance that does not covary with warming. To explore this intergenerational discrepancy in CMIP results, we decompose changes in monthly temperature variance into those arising from changes in sensitivity to forcing and changes in forcing variance. Across models, sensitivity increases with local warming in both CMIP5 and CMIP6 at an average rate of 5.7 ([3.7, 7.9]; 95% c.i.) × 10−3°C per W m−2 per °C warming. We use a simple model of moist surface energetics to explain increased sensitivity as a consequence of greater atmospheric demand (∼70%) and drier soil (∼40%) that is partially offset by the Planck feedback (∼−10%). Conversely, forcing variance is stable in CMIP5 but decreases with warming in CMIP6 at an average rate of −21 ([−28, −15]; 95% c.i.) W2 m−4 per °C warming. We examine scaling relationships with mean cloud fraction and find that mean forcing variance decreases with decreasing cloud fraction at twice the rate in CMIP6 than CMIP5. The stability of CMIP6 temperature variance is, thus, a consequence of offsetting changes in sensitivity and forcing variance. Further work to determine which models and generations of CMIP simulations better represent changes in cloud radiative forcing is important for assessing risks associated with increased temperature variance.
continental temperature variability, extreme events, soil moisture, radiative forcing, evapotranspiration, CMIP
Chan, Duo
4c1278dc-7f39-4b67-b1cd-3f81f55f4906
Rigden, Angela
5bf5defc-2240-4196-9449-adecea3c8af2
Proctor, Jonathan
0a074970-798d-47a6-aeaa-4d311db80e0b
Chan, Pak Wah
e649fb22-e18c-47d2-8263-7f37c121fdd2
Huybers, Peter
48e9a517-aa2a-40f1-96ef-06d76b19291c
11 February 2022
Chan, Duo
4c1278dc-7f39-4b67-b1cd-3f81f55f4906
Rigden, Angela
5bf5defc-2240-4196-9449-adecea3c8af2
Proctor, Jonathan
0a074970-798d-47a6-aeaa-4d311db80e0b
Chan, Pak Wah
e649fb22-e18c-47d2-8263-7f37c121fdd2
Huybers, Peter
48e9a517-aa2a-40f1-96ef-06d76b19291c
Chan, Duo, Rigden, Angela, Proctor, Jonathan, Chan, Pak Wah and Huybers, Peter
(2022)
Differences in radiative forcing, not sensitivity, explain differences in summertime land temperature variance change between CMIP5 and CMIP6.
Earth's Future, 10 (2).
(doi:10.1029/2021EF002402).
Abstract
How summertime temperature variability will change with warming has important implications for climate adaptation and mitigation. CMIP5 simulations indicate a compound risk of extreme hot temperatures in western Europe from both warming and increasing temperature variance. CMIP6 simulations, however, indicate only a moderate increase in temperature variance that does not covary with warming. To explore this intergenerational discrepancy in CMIP results, we decompose changes in monthly temperature variance into those arising from changes in sensitivity to forcing and changes in forcing variance. Across models, sensitivity increases with local warming in both CMIP5 and CMIP6 at an average rate of 5.7 ([3.7, 7.9]; 95% c.i.) × 10−3°C per W m−2 per °C warming. We use a simple model of moist surface energetics to explain increased sensitivity as a consequence of greater atmospheric demand (∼70%) and drier soil (∼40%) that is partially offset by the Planck feedback (∼−10%). Conversely, forcing variance is stable in CMIP5 but decreases with warming in CMIP6 at an average rate of −21 ([−28, −15]; 95% c.i.) W2 m−4 per °C warming. We examine scaling relationships with mean cloud fraction and find that mean forcing variance decreases with decreasing cloud fraction at twice the rate in CMIP6 than CMIP5. The stability of CMIP6 temperature variance is, thus, a consequence of offsetting changes in sensitivity and forcing variance. Further work to determine which models and generations of CMIP simulations better represent changes in cloud radiative forcing is important for assessing risks associated with increased temperature variance.
Text
Earth s Future - 2022 - Chan
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 24 January 2022
e-pub ahead of print date: 31 January 2022
Published date: 11 February 2022
Keywords:
continental temperature variability, extreme events, soil moisture, radiative forcing, evapotranspiration, CMIP
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 481959
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/481959
ISSN: 2328-4277
PURE UUID: bd61a67d-ea19-4c9c-8b24-0e55bfcabeed
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 14 Sep 2023 16:35
Last modified: 18 Mar 2024 04:15
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Duo Chan
Author:
Angela Rigden
Author:
Jonathan Proctor
Author:
Pak Wah Chan
Author:
Peter Huybers
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics