当前位置: X-MOL 学术Nat. Geosci. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Causes of differences in model and satellite tropospheric warming rates
Nature Geoscience ( IF 18.3 ) Pub Date : 2017-06-19 00:00:00 , DOI: 10.1038/ngeo2973
Benjamin D. Santer , John C. Fyfe , Giuliana Pallotta , Gregory M. Flato , Gerald A. Meehl , Matthew H. England , Ed Hawkins , Michael E. Mann , Jeffrey F. Painter , Céline Bonfils , Ivana Cvijanovic , Carl Mears , Frank J. Wentz , Stephen Po-Chedley , Qiang Fu , Cheng-Zhi Zou

In the early twenty-first century, satellite-derived tropospheric warming trends were generally smaller than trends estimated from a large multi-model ensemble. Because observations and coupled model simulations do not have the same phasing of natural internal variability, such decadal differences in simulated and observed warming rates invariably occur. Here we analyse global-mean tropospheric temperatures from satellites and climate model simulations to examine whether warming rate differences over the satellite era can be explained by internal climate variability alone. We find that in the last two decades of the twentieth century, differences between modelled and observed tropospheric temperature trends are broadly consistent with internal variability. Over most of the early twenty-first century, however, model tropospheric warming is substantially larger than observed; warming rate differences are generally outside the range of trends arising from internal variability. The probability that multi-decadal internal variability fully explains the asymmetry between the late twentieth and early twenty-first century results is low (between zero and about 9%). It is also unlikely that this asymmetry is due to the combined effects of internal variability and a model error in climate sensitivity. We conclude that model overestimation of tropospheric warming in the early twenty-first century is partly due to systematic deficiencies in some of the post-2000 external forcings used in the model simulations.

中文翻译:

模式和卫星对流层升温速率不同的原因

在二十一世纪初,源自卫星的对流层变暖趋势通常小于大型多模式合奏估计的趋势。由于观测和耦合模型模拟的自然内部可变性相位不同,因此模拟和观测到的升温速率的年代际差异总是会发生。在这里,我们分析了来自卫星的全球平均对流层温度和气候模型模拟,以检验是否仅靠内部气候变化就可以解释卫星时代的升温速率差异。我们发现,在二十世纪的最后二十年中,对流层温度趋势的模拟与观测值之间的差异与内部变异性基本一致。但是,在二十一世纪初的大部分时间里,对流层模型升温明显大于观测值;升温速率的差异通常不在由内部可变性引起的趋势范围之内。年代际内部变率完全可以解释二十世纪末至二十一世纪初结果之间的不对称性的可能性很低(介于零至9%之间)。这种不对称也不大可能是由于内部变异性和气候敏感性模型误差的综合作用所致。我们得出的结论是,对二十一世纪初期对流层变暖的模型高估部分是由于模型模拟中使用的2000年后外部强迫中的某些系统性缺陷。年代际内部变率完全可以解释二十世纪末至二十一世纪初结果之间的不对称性的可能性很低(介于零至9%之间)。这种不对称也不大可能是由于内部变异性和气候敏感性模型误差的综合作用所致。我们得出的结论是,对二十一世纪初期对流层变暖的模型高估部分是由于模型模拟中使用的2000年后外部强迫中的某些系统性缺陷。年代际内部变率完全可以解释二十世纪末至二十一世纪初结果之间的不对称性的可能性很低(介于零至9%之间)。这种不对称也不大可能是由于内部变异性和气候敏感性模型误差的综合作用所致。我们得出的结论是,对二十一世纪初期对流层变暖的模型高估部分是由于模型模拟中使用的2000年后外部强迫中的某些系统性缺陷。
更新日期:2017-07-05
down
wechat
bug