4.6 Article

Is there a stratospheric radiative feedback in global warming simulations?

Journal

CLIMATE DYNAMICS
Volume 46, Issue 1-2, Pages 177-186

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00382-015-2577-2

Keywords

Stratosphere; Radiative feedback; CMIP5

Funding

  1. National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada [RGPIN418305-13]
  2. Fonds de recherche du Quebec-Nature et technologies
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41025018]
  4. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2010CB428606]
  5. Korea Ministry of Environment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The radiative impacts of the stratosphere in global warming simulations are investigated using abrupt CO2 quadrupling experiments of the Coupled Model Inter-comparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5), with a focus on stratospheric temperature and water vapor. It is found that the stratospheric temperature change has a robust bullhorn-like zonal-mean pattern due to a strengthening of the stratospheric overturning circulation. This temperature change modifies the zonal mean top-of-the-atmosphere energy balance, but the compensation of the regional effects leads to an insignificant global-mean radiative feedback (-0.02 +/- 0.04 W m(-2) K-1). The stratospheric water vapor concentration generally increases, which leads to a weak positive global-mean radiative feedback (0.02 +/- 0.01 W m(-2) K-1). The stratospheric moistening is related to mixing of elevated upper-tropospheric humidity, and, to a lesser extent, to change in tropical tropopause temperature. Our results indicate that the strength of the stratospheric water vapor feedback is noticeably larger in high-top models than in low-top ones. The results here indicate that although its radiative impact as a forcing adjustment is significant, the stratosphere makes a minor contribution to the overall climate feedback in CMIP5 models.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available