Journal cover Journal topic
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 5.509 IF 5.509
  • IF 5-year value: 5.689 IF 5-year 5.689
  • CiteScore value: 5.44 CiteScore 5.44
  • SNIP value: 1.519 SNIP 1.519
  • SJR value: 3.032 SJR 3.032
  • IPP value: 5.37 IPP 5.37
  • h5-index value: 86 h5-index 86
  • Scimago H index value: 161 Scimago H index 161
Volume 18, issue 17 | Copyright
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 13031-13053, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-13031-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Research article 11 Sep 2018

Research article | 11 Sep 2018

The importance of comprehensive parameter sampling and multiple observations for robust constraint of aerosol radiative forcing

Jill S. Johnson1, Leighton A. Regayre1, Masaru Yoshioka1, Kirsty J. Pringle1, Lindsay A. Lee1, David M. H. Sexton2, John W. Rostron2, Ben B. B. Booth2, and Kenneth S. Carslaw1 Jill S. Johnson et al.
  • 1Institute for Climate and Atmospheric Science, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
  • 2Met Office Hadley Centre, Fitzroy Road, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK

Abstract. Observational constraint of simulated aerosol and cloud properties is an essential part of building trustworthy climate models for calculating aerosol radiative forcing. Models are usually tuned to achieve good agreement with observations, but tuning produces just one of many potential variants of a model, so the model uncertainty cannot be determined. Here we estimate the uncertainty in aerosol effective radiative forcing (ERF) in a tuned climate model by constraining 4 million variants of the HadGEM3-UKCA aerosol–climate model to match nine common observations (top-of-atmosphere shortwave flux, aerosol optical depth, PM2.5, cloud condensation nuclei at 0.2% supersaturation (CCN0.2), and concentrations of sulfate, black carbon and organic carbon, as well as decadal trends in aerosol optical depth and surface shortwave radiation.) The model uncertainty is calculated by using a perturbed parameter ensemble that samples 27 uncertainties in both the aerosol model and the physical climate model, and we use synthetic observations generated from the model itself to determine the potential of each observational type to constrain this uncertainty. Focusing over Europe in July, we show that the aerosol ERF uncertainty can be reduced by about 30% by constraining it to the nine observations, demonstrating that producing climate models with an observationally plausible base state can contribute to narrowing the uncertainty in aerosol ERF. However, the uncertainty in the aerosol ERF after observational constraint is large compared to the typical spread of a multi-model ensemble. Our results therefore raise questions about whether the underlying multi-model uncertainty would be larger if similar approaches as adopted here were applied more widely. The approach presented in this study could be used to identify the most effective observations for model constraint. It is hoped that aerosol ERF uncertainty can be further reduced by introducing process-related constraints; however, any such results will be robust only if the enormous number of potential model variants is explored.

Download & links
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
We estimate the uncertainty in an aerosol–climate model that has been tuned to match several common types of observations. We used a large set of model simulations and built emulators so that we could generate 4 million “variants” of our climate model. Even after using nine aerosol and cloud observations to constrain the model, the uncertainty remains large. We conclude that estimates of aerosol forcing from multi-model studies are likely to be more uncertain than currently estimated.
We estimate the uncertainty in an aerosol–climate model that has been tuned to match several...
Citation
Share