skip to main content
DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Climate Change Projections in CESM1(CAM5) Compared to CCSM4

Abstract

Future climate change projections for phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) are introduced for the Community Earth System Model version 1 that includes the Community Atmospheric Model version 5 [CESM1(CAM5)]. These findings are compared to the Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4) and include simulations using the representative concentration pathway (RCP) mitigation scenarios, and extensions for those scenarios beyond 2100 to 2300. Equilibrium climate sensitivity of CESM1(CAM5) is 4.10°C, which is higher than the CCSM4 value of 3.20°C. The transient climate response is 2.33°C, compared to the CCSM4 value of 1.73°C. Thus, even though CESM1(CAM5) includes both the direct and indirect effects of aerosols (CCSM4 had only the direct effect), the overall climate system response including forcing and feedbacks is greater in CESM1(CAM5) compared to CCSM4. The Atlantic Ocean meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) in CESM1(CAM5) weakens considerably in the twenty-first century in all the RCP scenarios, and recovers more slowly in the lower forcing scenarios. The total aerosol optical depth (AOD) changes from ~0.12 in 2006 to ~0.10 in 2100, compared to a preindustrial 1850 value of 0.08, so there is less negative forcing (a net positive forcing) from that source during the twenty-first century. Asmore » a result, the change from 2006 to 2100 in aerosol direct forcing in CESM1(CAM5) contributes to greater twenty-first century warming relative to CCSM4. There is greater Arctic warming and sea ice loss in CESM1(CAM5), with an ice-free summer Arctic occurring by about 2060 in RCP8.5 (2040s in September) as opposed to about 2100 in CCSM4 (2060s in September).« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [2];  [1];  [1];  [1];  [1];  [1];  [1];  [1]
  1. National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO (United States)
  2. National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO (United States); Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne, VIC (Australia)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States). Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Science (SC)
OSTI Identifier:
1565089
Grant/Contract Number:  
AC02-05CH11231; AC05-00OR22725
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Journal of Climate
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 26; Journal Issue: 17; Journal ID: ISSN 0894-8755
Publisher:
American Meteorological Society
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; Meridional overturning circulation; Clouds; Greenhouse gases; Climate models; Coupled models

Citation Formats

Meehl, Gerald A., Washington, Warren M., Arblaster, Julie M., Hu, Aixue, Teng, Haiyan, Kay, Jennifer E., Gettelman, Andrew, Lawrence, David M., Sanderson, Benjamin M., and Strand, Warren G. Climate Change Projections in CESM1(CAM5) Compared to CCSM4. United States: N. p., 2013. Web. doi:10.1175/jcli-d-12-00572.1.
Meehl, Gerald A., Washington, Warren M., Arblaster, Julie M., Hu, Aixue, Teng, Haiyan, Kay, Jennifer E., Gettelman, Andrew, Lawrence, David M., Sanderson, Benjamin M., & Strand, Warren G. Climate Change Projections in CESM1(CAM5) Compared to CCSM4. United States. doi:10.1175/jcli-d-12-00572.1.
Meehl, Gerald A., Washington, Warren M., Arblaster, Julie M., Hu, Aixue, Teng, Haiyan, Kay, Jennifer E., Gettelman, Andrew, Lawrence, David M., Sanderson, Benjamin M., and Strand, Warren G. Fri . "Climate Change Projections in CESM1(CAM5) Compared to CCSM4". United States. doi:10.1175/jcli-d-12-00572.1. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1565089.
@article{osti_1565089,
title = {Climate Change Projections in CESM1(CAM5) Compared to CCSM4},
author = {Meehl, Gerald A. and Washington, Warren M. and Arblaster, Julie M. and Hu, Aixue and Teng, Haiyan and Kay, Jennifer E. and Gettelman, Andrew and Lawrence, David M. and Sanderson, Benjamin M. and Strand, Warren G.},
abstractNote = {Future climate change projections for phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) are introduced for the Community Earth System Model version 1 that includes the Community Atmospheric Model version 5 [CESM1(CAM5)]. These findings are compared to the Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4) and include simulations using the representative concentration pathway (RCP) mitigation scenarios, and extensions for those scenarios beyond 2100 to 2300. Equilibrium climate sensitivity of CESM1(CAM5) is 4.10°C, which is higher than the CCSM4 value of 3.20°C. The transient climate response is 2.33°C, compared to the CCSM4 value of 1.73°C. Thus, even though CESM1(CAM5) includes both the direct and indirect effects of aerosols (CCSM4 had only the direct effect), the overall climate system response including forcing and feedbacks is greater in CESM1(CAM5) compared to CCSM4. The Atlantic Ocean meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) in CESM1(CAM5) weakens considerably in the twenty-first century in all the RCP scenarios, and recovers more slowly in the lower forcing scenarios. The total aerosol optical depth (AOD) changes from ~0.12 in 2006 to ~0.10 in 2100, compared to a preindustrial 1850 value of 0.08, so there is less negative forcing (a net positive forcing) from that source during the twenty-first century. As a result, the change from 2006 to 2100 in aerosol direct forcing in CESM1(CAM5) contributes to greater twenty-first century warming relative to CCSM4. There is greater Arctic warming and sea ice loss in CESM1(CAM5), with an ice-free summer Arctic occurring by about 2060 in RCP8.5 (2040s in September) as opposed to about 2100 in CCSM4 (2060s in September).},
doi = {10.1175/jcli-d-12-00572.1},
journal = {Journal of Climate},
number = 17,
volume = 26,
place = {United States},
year = {2013},
month = {8}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 160 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:

Works referencing / citing this record:

Stratospheric Ozone Depletion: An Unlikely Driver of the Regional Trends in Antarctic Sea Ice in Austral Fall in the Late Twentieth Century
journal, November 2017

  • Landrum, Laura L.; Holland, Marika M.; Raphael, Marilyn N.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 44, Issue 21
  • DOI: 10.1002/2017gl075618

Quantitative analysis of the feedback induced by the freshwater flux in the tropical Pacific using CMIP5
journal, August 2015


Pertinence of reactive, active, and robust adaptation strategies in forest management under climate change
journal, May 2017

  • Yousefpour, Rasoul; Augustynczik, Andrey L. D.; Hanewinkel, Marc
  • Annals of Forest Science, Vol. 74, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1007/s13595-017-0640-3

The impact of climate change on electricity demand in Australia
journal, April 2018

  • Emodi, Nnaemeka Vincent; Chaiechi, Taha; Alam Beg, ABM Rabiul
  • Energy & Environment, Vol. 29, Issue 7
  • DOI: 10.1177/0958305x18776538

Different contributions of Arctic sea ice anomalies from different regions to North China summer ozone pollution
journal, July 2019

  • Yin, Zhicong; Yuan, Dongmin; Zhang, Xinyu
  • International Journal of Climatology, Vol. 40, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1002/joc.6228

Future Fire Impacts on Smoke Concentrations, Visibility, and Health in the Contiguous United States
journal, August 2018


Quantifying climate feedbacks in polar regions
journal, May 2018


Urban warming and future air-conditioning use in an Asian megacity: importance of positive feedback
journal, October 2019

  • Takane, Yuya; Kikegawa, Yukihiro; Hara, Masayuki
  • npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, Vol. 2, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1038/s41612-019-0096-2

Revisiting the observed surface climate response to large volcanic eruptions
journal, January 2017

  • Wunderlich, Fabian; Mitchell, Daniel M.
  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 17, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.5194/acp-17-485-2017

Review of the global models used within phase 1 of the Chemistry–Climate Model Initiative (CCMI)
journal, January 2017

  • Morgenstern, Olaf; Hegglin, Michaela I.; Rozanov, Eugene
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 10, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-10-639-2017

Stratospheric Ozone Depletion: An Unlikely Driver of the Regional Trends in Antarctic Sea Ice in Austral Fall in the Late Twentieth Century
journal, November 2017

  • Landrum, Laura L.; Holland, Marika M.; Raphael, Marilyn N.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 44, Issue 21
  • DOI: 10.1002/2017gl075618

Different contributions of Arctic sea ice anomalies from different regions to North China summer ozone pollution
journal, July 2019

  • Yin, Zhicong; Yuan, Dongmin; Zhang, Xinyu
  • International Journal of Climatology, Vol. 40, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1002/joc.6228

Quantitative analysis of the feedback induced by the freshwater flux in the tropical Pacific using CMIP5
journal, August 2015


Pertinence of reactive, active, and robust adaptation strategies in forest management under climate change
journal, May 2017

  • Yousefpour, Rasoul; Augustynczik, Andrey L. D.; Hanewinkel, Marc
  • Annals of Forest Science, Vol. 74, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1007/s13595-017-0640-3

Future Fire Impacts on Smoke Concentrations, Visibility, and Health in the Contiguous United States
journal, August 2018


Quantifying climate feedbacks in polar regions
journal, May 2018


Urban warming and future air-conditioning use in an Asian megacity: importance of positive feedback
journal, October 2019

  • Takane, Yuya; Kikegawa, Yukihiro; Hara, Masayuki
  • npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, Vol. 2, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1038/s41612-019-0096-2

The impact of climate change on electricity demand in Australia
journal, April 2018

  • Emodi, Nnaemeka Vincent; Chaiechi, Taha; Alam Beg, ABM Rabiul
  • Energy & Environment, Vol. 29, Issue 7
  • DOI: 10.1177/0958305x18776538

Expansion of the Lyme Disease Vector Ixodes Scapularis in Canada Inferred from CMIP5 Climate Projections
journal, May 2017

  • McPherson, Michelle; García-García, Almudena; Cuesta-Valero, Francisco José
  • Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 125, Issue 5
  • DOI: 10.1289/ehp57

Impacts of Mt Pinatubo volcanic aerosol on the tropical stratosphere in chemistry–climate model simulations using CCMI and CMIP6 stratospheric aerosol data
journal, January 2017

  • Revell, Laura E.; Stenke, Andrea; Luo, Beiping
  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 17, Issue 21
  • DOI: 10.5194/acp-17-13139-2017

Revisiting the observed surface climate response to large volcanic eruptions
journal, January 2017

  • Wunderlich, Fabian; Mitchell, Daniel M.
  • Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 17, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.5194/acp-17-485-2017

Review of the global models used within phase 1 of the Chemistry–Climate Model Initiative (CCMI)
journal, January 2017

  • Morgenstern, Olaf; Hegglin, Michaela I.; Rozanov, Eugene
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 10, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-10-639-2017