Global-mean radiative feedbacks and forcing in atmosphere-only and coupled atmosphere-ocean climate change experiments

Geophysical Research Letters

Volumn 41, Issue 11, 2014, Pages 4035-4042

  Ringer, Mark A ^a   Andrews, Timothy ^a   Webb, Mark J ^a  

^a MET OFFICE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

climate models; feedbacks; forcing

Indexed keywords

ATMOSPHERIC RADIATION; ATMOSPHERIC THERMODYNAMICS; CARBON DIOXIDE; CLIMATE MODELS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EXPERIMENTS; GLOBAL WARMING; STATISTICS;

ANTICORRELATION; CLIMATE FEEDBACKS; COUPLED MODEL INTERCOMPARISON PROJECT; COUPLED SIMULATION; FORCED SIMULATION; FORCING; PHYSICAL PROCESS; RADIATIVE FORCINGS;

FEEDBACK;

CARBON DIOXIDE; CLEAR SKY; CLIMATE CHANGE; CLIMATE FEEDBACK; CLIMATE MODELING; CLOUD RADIATIVE FORCING; GLOBAL WARMING; PARAMETERIZATION; SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE; SIMULATION;

EID: 84902040526     PISSN: 00948276     EISSN: 19448007     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/2014GL060347     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Andrews, T., J. M. Gregory, M. J. Webb, and, K. E. Taylor, (2012), Forcing, feedbacks and climate sensitivity in CMIP5 coupled atmosphere-ocean climate models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L09712, doi: 10.1029/2012GL051607.
2. Dessler, A. E., (2013), Observations of climate feedbacks over 2000-2010 and comparisons to climate models, J. Clim., 26, 333-342, doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00640.1.
3. Forster, P. M., T. Andrews, P. Good, J. M. Gregory, L. S. Jackson, and, M. Zelinka, (2013), Evaluating adjusted forcing and model spread for historical and future scenarios in the CMIP5 generation of climate models, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 118, 1139-1150, doi: 10.1002/jgrd.50174.
4. Good, P., et al. (2012), A step-response approach for predicting and understanding non-linear precipitation changes, Clim. Dyn., 39, 2789-2803, doi: 10.1007/s00382-012-1571-1.
5. Gregory, J. M., W. J. Ingram, M. A. Palmer, G. S. Jones, P. A. Stott, R. B. Thorpe, J. A. Lowe, T. C. Johns, and, K. D. Williams, (2004), A new method for diagnosing radiative forcing and climate sensitivity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L03205, doi: 10.1029/2003GL018747.
6. Kamae, Y., and, M. Watanabe, (2012), On the robustness of tropospheric adjustment in CMIP5 models, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L23808, doi: 10.1029/2012GL054275.
7. Qu, X., et al. (2013), On the spread of changes in marine low cloud cover in climate model simulations of the 21st century, Clim. Dyn., doi: 10.1007/s00382-013-1945-z.
8. Soden, B. J., A. J. Broccoli, and, R. S. Hemler, (2004), On the use of cloud forcing to estimate cloud feedback, J. Clim., 17, 3661-3665. (Pubitemid 39500319)
9. Soden, B. J., et al. (2008), Quantifying climate feedbacks using radiative kernels, J. Clim., 21, 3504-3520.
10. Stevens, B., et al. (2013), Atmospheric component of the MPI-M Earth System Model: ECHAM6, J. Adv. Model. Earth. Syst., 5, 146-172, doi: 10.1002/jame.20015.
11. Taylor, K. E., R. J. Stouffer, and, G. A. Meehl, (2012), An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93 (485-498), 2012, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1.
12. Webb, M. J., and, A. P. Lock, (2013), Coupling between subtropical cloud feedback and the local hydrological cycle in a climate model, Clim. Dyn., 41, 1923-1939.
13. Webb, M. J., F. H. Lambert, and, J. M. Gregory, (2013), Origins of differences in climate sensitivity, forcing and feedback in climate models, Clim. Dyn., 40, 677-707.
14. 2, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D17108, doi: 10.1029/2006JD008174. (Pubitemid 350042304)