HUSCAP logo Hokkaido Univ. logo

Hokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers >
Graduate School of Environmental Science / Faculty of Environmental Earth Science >
Peer-reviewed Journal Articles, etc >

Robust Seasonality of Arctic Warming Processes in Two Different Versions of the MIROC GCM

Files in This Item:
jcli-d-14-00086.1.pdf3.27 MBPDFView/Open
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:http://hdl.handle.net/2115/57899

Title: Robust Seasonality of Arctic Warming Processes in Two Different Versions of the MIROC GCM
Authors: Yoshimori, Masakazu Browse this author
Abe-Ouchi, Ayako Browse this author
Watanabe, Masahiro Browse this author →KAKEN DB
Oka, Akira Browse this author
Ogura, Tomoo Browse this author
Issue Date: 15-Aug-2014
Publisher: American Meteorological Society
Journal Title: Journal of Climate
Volume: 27
Issue: 16
Start Page: 6358
End Page: 6375
Publisher DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00086.1
Abstract: It is one of the most robust projected responses of climate models to the increase of atmospheric CO2 concentration that the Arctic experiences a rapid warming with a magnitude larger than the rest of the world. While many processes are proposed as important, the relative contribution of individual processes to the Arctic warming is not often investigated systematically. Feedbacks are quantified in two different versions of an atmosphere-ocean GCM under idealized transient experiments based on an energy balance analysis that extends from the surface to the top of the atmosphere. The emphasis is placed on the largest warming from late autumn to early winter (October-December) and the difference from other seasons. It is confirmed that dominating processes vary with season. In autumn, the largest contribution to the Arctic surface warming is made by a reduction of ocean heat storage and cloud radiative feedback. In the annual mean, on the other hand, it is the albedo feedback that contributes the most, with increasing ocean heat uptake to the deeper layers working as a negative feedback. While the qualitative results are robust between the two models, they differ quantitatively, indicating the need for further constraint on each process. Ocean heat uptake, lower tropospheric stability, and low-level cloud response probably require special attention.
Rights: © Copyright 2014 American Meteorological Society (AMS). Permission to use figures, tables, and brief excerpts from this work in scientific and educational works is hereby granted provided that the source is acknowledged. Any use of material in this work that is determined to be “fair use” under Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act or that satisfies the conditions specified in Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act (17 USC §108, as revised by P.L. 94-553) does not require the AMS’s permission. Republication, systematic reproduction, posting in electronic form, such as on a web site or in a searchable database, or other uses of this material, except as exempted by the above statement, requires written permission or a license from the AMS. Additional details are provided in the AMS Copyright Policy, available on the AMS Web site located at (http://www.ametsoc.org/) or from the AMS at 617-227-2425 or copyright@ametsoc.org.
Type: article
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2115/57899
Appears in Collections:環境科学院・地球環境科学研究院 (Graduate School of Environmental Science / Faculty of Environmental Earth Science) > 雑誌発表論文等 (Peer-reviewed Journal Articles, etc)

Submitter: 吉森 正和

Export metadata:

OAI-PMH ( junii2 , jpcoar )


 

Feedback - Hokkaido University