Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM‐ESM2‐1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present‐Day and Future Climate
Abstract This study introduces CNRM‐ESM2‐1, the Earth system (ES) model of second generation developed by CNRM‐CERFACS for the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). CNRM‐ESM2‐1 offers a higher model complexity than the Atmosphere‐Ocean General Circulation Model CNRM‐CM6‐1...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
American Geophysical Union (AGU)
2019-12-01
|
Series: | Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001791 |
id |
doaj-a37eda6a06ba49768f48234df32530fa |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Roland Séférian Pierre Nabat Martine Michou David Saint‐Martin Aurore Voldoire Jeanne Colin Bertrand Decharme Christine Delire Sarah Berthet Matthieu Chevallier Stephane Sénési Laurent Franchisteguy Jessica Vial Marc Mallet Emilie Joetzjer Olivier Geoffroy Jean‐François Guérémy Marie‐Pierre Moine Rym Msadek Aurélien Ribes Matthias Rocher Romain Roehrig David Salas‐y‐Mélia Emilia Sanchez Laurent Terray Sophie Valcke Robin Waldman Olivier Aumont Laurent Bopp Julie Deshayes Christian Éthé Gurvan Madec |
spellingShingle |
Roland Séférian Pierre Nabat Martine Michou David Saint‐Martin Aurore Voldoire Jeanne Colin Bertrand Decharme Christine Delire Sarah Berthet Matthieu Chevallier Stephane Sénési Laurent Franchisteguy Jessica Vial Marc Mallet Emilie Joetzjer Olivier Geoffroy Jean‐François Guérémy Marie‐Pierre Moine Rym Msadek Aurélien Ribes Matthias Rocher Romain Roehrig David Salas‐y‐Mélia Emilia Sanchez Laurent Terray Sophie Valcke Robin Waldman Olivier Aumont Laurent Bopp Julie Deshayes Christian Éthé Gurvan Madec Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM‐ESM2‐1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present‐Day and Future Climate Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems climate modeling Earth system modeling biogeochemical cycles aerosols CMIP6 future projections |
author_facet |
Roland Séférian Pierre Nabat Martine Michou David Saint‐Martin Aurore Voldoire Jeanne Colin Bertrand Decharme Christine Delire Sarah Berthet Matthieu Chevallier Stephane Sénési Laurent Franchisteguy Jessica Vial Marc Mallet Emilie Joetzjer Olivier Geoffroy Jean‐François Guérémy Marie‐Pierre Moine Rym Msadek Aurélien Ribes Matthias Rocher Romain Roehrig David Salas‐y‐Mélia Emilia Sanchez Laurent Terray Sophie Valcke Robin Waldman Olivier Aumont Laurent Bopp Julie Deshayes Christian Éthé Gurvan Madec |
author_sort |
Roland Séférian |
title |
Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM‐ESM2‐1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present‐Day and Future Climate |
title_short |
Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM‐ESM2‐1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present‐Day and Future Climate |
title_full |
Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM‐ESM2‐1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present‐Day and Future Climate |
title_fullStr |
Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM‐ESM2‐1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present‐Day and Future Climate |
title_full_unstemmed |
Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM‐ESM2‐1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present‐Day and Future Climate |
title_sort |
evaluation of cnrm earth system model, cnrm‐esm2‐1: role of earth system processes in present‐day and future climate |
publisher |
American Geophysical Union (AGU) |
series |
Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems |
issn |
1942-2466 |
publishDate |
2019-12-01 |
description |
Abstract This study introduces CNRM‐ESM2‐1, the Earth system (ES) model of second generation developed by CNRM‐CERFACS for the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). CNRM‐ESM2‐1 offers a higher model complexity than the Atmosphere‐Ocean General Circulation Model CNRM‐CM6‐1 by adding interactive ES components such as carbon cycle, aerosols, and atmospheric chemistry. As both models share the same code, physical parameterizations, and grid resolution, they offer a fully traceable framework to investigate how far the represented ES processes impact the model performance over present‐day, response to external forcing and future climate projections. Using a large variety of CMIP6 experiments, we show that represented ES processes impact more prominently the model response to external forcing than the model performance over present‐day. Both models display comparable performance at replicating modern observations although the mean climate of CNRM‐ESM2‐1 is slightly warmer than that of CNRM‐CM6‐1. This difference arises from land cover‐aerosol interactions where the use of different soil vegetation distributions between both models impacts the rate of dust emissions. This interaction results in a smaller aerosol burden in CNRM‐ESM2‐1 than in CNRM‐CM6‐1, leading to a different surface radiative budget and climate. Greater differences are found when comparing the model response to external forcing and future climate projections. Represented ES processes damp future warming by up to 10% in CNRM‐ESM2‐1 with respect to CNRM‐CM6‐1. The representation of land vegetation and the CO2‐water‐stomatal feedback between both models explain about 60% of this difference. The remainder is driven by other ES feedbacks such as the natural aerosol feedback. |
topic |
climate modeling Earth system modeling biogeochemical cycles aerosols CMIP6 future projections |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001791 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT rolandseferian evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT pierrenabat evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT martinemichou evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT davidsaintmartin evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT aurorevoldoire evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT jeannecolin evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT bertranddecharme evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT christinedelire evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT sarahberthet evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT matthieuchevallier evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT stephanesenesi evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT laurentfranchisteguy evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT jessicavial evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT marcmallet evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT emiliejoetzjer evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT oliviergeoffroy evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT jeanfrancoisgueremy evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT mariepierremoine evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT rymmsadek evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT aurelienribes evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT matthiasrocher evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT romainroehrig evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT davidsalasymelia evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT emiliasanchez evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT laurentterray evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT sophievalcke evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT robinwaldman evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT olivieraumont evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT laurentbopp evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT juliedeshayes evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT christianethe evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate AT gurvanmadec evaluationofcnrmearthsystemmodelcnrmesm21roleofearthsystemprocessesinpresentdayandfutureclimate |
_version_ |
1725809176402198528 |
spelling |
doaj-a37eda6a06ba49768f48234df32530fa2020-11-24T22:10:07ZengAmerican Geophysical Union (AGU)Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems1942-24662019-12-0111124182422710.1029/2019MS001791Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM‐ESM2‐1: Role of Earth System Processes in Present‐Day and Future ClimateRoland Séférian0Pierre Nabat1Martine Michou2David Saint‐Martin3Aurore Voldoire4Jeanne Colin5Bertrand Decharme6Christine Delire7Sarah Berthet8Matthieu Chevallier9Stephane Sénési10Laurent Franchisteguy11Jessica Vial12Marc Mallet13Emilie Joetzjer14Olivier Geoffroy15Jean‐François Guérémy16Marie‐Pierre Moine17Rym Msadek18Aurélien Ribes19Matthias Rocher20Romain Roehrig21David Salas‐y‐Mélia22Emilia Sanchez23Laurent Terray24Sophie Valcke25Robin Waldman26Olivier Aumont27Laurent Bopp28Julie Deshayes29Christian Éthé30Gurvan Madec31CNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceEcole Normale Supérieure/PSL Res. Univ, Ecole Polytechnique Sorbonne Université Paris FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCECI Université de Toulouse, CNRS, CERFACS Toulouse FranceCECI Université de Toulouse, CNRS, CERFACS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceCECI Université de Toulouse, CNRS, CERFACS Toulouse FranceCECI Université de Toulouse, CNRS, CERFACS Toulouse FranceCECI Université de Toulouse, CNRS, CERFACS Toulouse FranceCNRM Université de Toulouse, Météo‐France, CNRS Toulouse FranceLOCEAN‐IPSL Sorbonne Université‐CNRS‐IRD‐MNHN Paris FranceEcole Normale Supérieure/PSL Res. Univ, Ecole Polytechnique Sorbonne Université Paris FranceLOCEAN‐IPSL Sorbonne Université‐CNRS‐IRD‐MNHN Paris FranceInstitut Pierre Simon Laplace Paris FranceLOCEAN‐IPSL Sorbonne Université‐CNRS‐IRD‐MNHN Paris FranceAbstract This study introduces CNRM‐ESM2‐1, the Earth system (ES) model of second generation developed by CNRM‐CERFACS for the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). CNRM‐ESM2‐1 offers a higher model complexity than the Atmosphere‐Ocean General Circulation Model CNRM‐CM6‐1 by adding interactive ES components such as carbon cycle, aerosols, and atmospheric chemistry. As both models share the same code, physical parameterizations, and grid resolution, they offer a fully traceable framework to investigate how far the represented ES processes impact the model performance over present‐day, response to external forcing and future climate projections. Using a large variety of CMIP6 experiments, we show that represented ES processes impact more prominently the model response to external forcing than the model performance over present‐day. Both models display comparable performance at replicating modern observations although the mean climate of CNRM‐ESM2‐1 is slightly warmer than that of CNRM‐CM6‐1. This difference arises from land cover‐aerosol interactions where the use of different soil vegetation distributions between both models impacts the rate of dust emissions. This interaction results in a smaller aerosol burden in CNRM‐ESM2‐1 than in CNRM‐CM6‐1, leading to a different surface radiative budget and climate. Greater differences are found when comparing the model response to external forcing and future climate projections. Represented ES processes damp future warming by up to 10% in CNRM‐ESM2‐1 with respect to CNRM‐CM6‐1. The representation of land vegetation and the CO2‐water‐stomatal feedback between both models explain about 60% of this difference. The remainder is driven by other ES feedbacks such as the natural aerosol feedback.https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001791climate modelingEarth system modelingbiogeochemical cyclesaerosolsCMIP6future projections |