AeroCom phase II

• Michael Schulz, Mian Chin, Stefan Kinne Jan Griesfeller, Brigitte Koffi, Nicolas Huneeus & Aerocom modellers, NASA&CNES&ESA science team,

Aeronet/GAW/Skynet, EUSAAR-EMEP-IMPROVE-EANET Pis and contributors

http:/nansen.ipsl.jussieu.fr

http:/aerocom.met.no

AeroCom Motivation

• Why are these damned aerosol models so different? • Radiative forcing best guess and trend? • Can we constrain model components and regional

differences with more observations? • Are the CMIP5 models realistic wrt to aerosols? • Put new aerosol model results in context / Compare to

old & Aerocom Median Model / same scale / improve… • Do we understand aerosol emission trends? • Are there “non-linearities” involved in trends and future

predictions of aerosol effects?

AeroCom Infrastructure Development

• Funding through links to cci-Aerosol, MACC-II, ECLIPSE, EMEP, ACTRIS, IS-ENES, WMO-SDS (ESA?), partner institutes core resources

• Database approaching 10 TB / security… • Web interface reliability / documentation • Observational database updates , 1980 - 2010, NRT,

satellites, in-situ++ , CALIOP, aircraft • Harmonization of new model data ...cmor-ipcc • Expert-user server • Annual workshop organisation&website

Next 10th AeroCom workshop

noon 3 October - noon 6 October 2011 hosted by Kyushu University, Japan Host Toshi Takemura

CAM4-Oslo CAM5-MAM3-PNNL CCCma ECHAM-MESSy-GMXe FMI_SALSA-EL FMI_SALSA-V1-TB GEOS-Chem-APM GEOSCHEM-v822 GISS-CMU GISS-MATRIX GISS-modelE GISS-TOMAS GLOMAPmodev4 GOCART-v4 HadGEM2-ES LSCE MPIHAM_V1_KZ MPIHAM_V2_KZ OsloCTM2 SPRINTARS-v384 TM5-V3

GISS-MATRIX -- /IPCC/MET/ GISS-modelE -- /IPCC/MET/ GOCART-v4 -- /0/ HadGEM2-ES -- /0/ LSCE_LOI_SS-IPCC3 /IPCC/ SPRINTARS-v384 -- /0 / FIX / IPCC / MET TM5-V3 -- /0/ (2000-2009)

CCCma -- SIZ1/2/3/4 GISS-MATRIX -- SIZ1/2/3/4 ECHAM-MESSy-GMXe -- SIZ1/2/3/4 GISS-TOMAS -- SIZ1/2/3/

CAM4-Oslo HadGEM2-ES MPIHAM_V2_KZ OsloCTM2 SPRINTARS-v384 GISS-MATRIX GISS-modelE

AEROCOM phase II submission status April 2011 A2

CTR

L Ph

ase

II co

ntro

l 20

06

Aero

sol H

indc

ast

1980

- ca

200

7

Dire

ct F

orci

ng

2006

and

185

0 M

icro

phys

ics

2006

Where compared ? Correlated ? Regional Normalized Bias ?

Local month to month variation? Histogram? Zonal Absolute Bias ?

AeroCom phase II standard visualization against observational data Example LSCE.A2.CTRL / Aeronet Aerosol Optical Depth, year 2006

Evaluation against multiple observational datasets Example ECHAM5-HAM.A2.CTRL

Absorption AOD Sulphate

Elemental Carbon

AOD

Fine AOD

Abs Coeff

BIAS in Aerosol Optical Depth 4 models – year 2008 Aeronet “sun” data

Nicolas Huneeus Dust model evaluation (ACP in press) Brigitte Koffi Caliop v3 Vertical profile evaluation Bjorn H. Samset / Gunnar Myhre Direct Radiative Forcing Mark Flanner Black Carbon on Snow Michael Schulz Best guess of forcing relevant aerosol fields Kostas Tsigaridis Organic aerosol model evaluation Cynthia Randles AeroCom model solar radiative transfer schemes Mian Chin Natural aerosol in hindcasts Thomas Diehl / Stefan Kinne An AeroCom hindcast emission dataset Michael Schulz Sulphate and AOD trend in hindcast simulations Philip Stier Prescribed aerosol optics impact on radiative forcing P. Suntharilingam Natural sulphate in Southern Ocean Atmosphere Graham Mann / Kirsty Pringle / Ari Asmi Size distribution evaluation Xiahong Liu Aerosol effects on precipitation +++

Analysis Work in progress

Direct Radiative Forcing [Wm2]

Comp CAM4-Oslo HadGEM2-ES

MPIHAM_V2_KZ OsloCTM2

SPRINTARS-v384

GISS-MATRIX

GISS-modelE

All -0.05 -0.31 -0.15 -0.43 -0.28 -0.49 -0.62

SO4 -0.45 -0.31 -0.28 -0.57 -0.37 -0.25 NA

BCFF 0.36 0.19 0.14 0.37 0.14 0.17 NA

OAFF -0.03 -0.04 -0.01 -0.09 -0.02 -0.03 NA

BB 0.08 -0.07 0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 NA

SOA NA NA -0.02 -0.07 NA NA NA

NO3 NA -0.11 NA -0.03 NA -0.13 NA

CSum -0.04 -0.33 -0.15 -0.41 -0.27 -0.24 NA

@

Brigitte Koffi et al. Global evaluation of aerosol vertical distribution simulated by AeroCom global climate models using CALIOP observations.

in preparation for JGR, 2011 Regional night-time aerosol extinction profile, 3 years of Caliop

Character. Extinction Height 0-6km in 13 regions Caliop versus Models

Koffi et al in prep 2011

Representation of High&Low versus Low aerosol

Model Correlation to Caliop Charactheristic Height in 13 Regions 0-10 km 0-6 km

GISS 0.85 0.27

GOCART 0.22 0.63

KYU 0.42 0.58

LSCE 0.17 0.79

MATCH 0.05 0.70

MOZGN 0.23 0.41

ECHAM 0.64 0.41

PNNL 0.00 0.88

TM5 0.29 0.67

UIO-CTM 0.83 0.54

ARQM 0.06 0.00

UIO-GCM 0.06 0.40

Koffi et al in prep 2011

Aerocom Hindcast experiments

1980-2008 (eventually 2000-2008) …2009 • HCA-O => Best guess emissions, nudged meteo • HCA-IPCC => ACCMIP emissions, nudged • HCA-FIX => Emissions of year 2011, nudged • HCA-MET => ACCMIP emissions, SST prescribed

aerosol feedbacks activated, freerunning

Slightly reduced set of AeroCom diagnostics Though 2000-2008 with daily info on observables

Hindcast analysis/technical topics

• Coordination with other hindcast experiments • Observational data trend significance • Radiative effect trends Surface/TOA/Cloudy • Regional emission trends (PM25, sulfate, loads)

=> model field bias correction? • Life time constraints from observations? • Black carbon regional trends • Impact of natural aerosols on trends • Compare 1980-2000 variability to 1850-2000-2030-2100

variability of life times , extinction coefficients, forcing efficiencies, regional distribution