4.7 Article

Response of the middle atmosphere to CO2 doubling:: Results from the Canadian Middle Atmosphere Model

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
Volume 20, Issue 7, Pages 1121-1144

Publisher

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/JCLI4030.1

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Canadian Middle Atmosphere Model (CMAM) has been used to examine the middle atmosphere response to CO, doubling. The radiative-photochemical response induced by doubling, CO2 alone and the response produced by changes in prescribed SSTs are found to be approximately additive, with the former effect dominating throughout the middle atmosphere. The paper discusses the overall response, with emphasis on the effects of SST changes, which allow I tropospheric response to the CO2 forcing. The overall response is a cooling of the middle atmosphere accompanied by significant increases in the ozone and water vapor abundances. The ozone radiative feedback occurs through both an increase in solar heating and a decrease in infrared cooling, with the latter accounting for up to 15% of the total effect. Changes in global mean water vapor cooling are negligible above similar to 30 hPa. Near the polar summer mesopause. the temperature response is weak and not statistically significant. The main effects of SST changes are a warmer troposphere, a warmer and higher tropopause, cell-like structures of heating and cooling at low and middle-latitudes in the middle atmosphere. warming in the summer mesosphere, water vapor increase throughout the domain. and O-3 decrease in the lower tropical stratosphere. No noticeable change in upward-propagating planetary wave activity in the extratropical winter-spring stratosphere and no significant temperature response in the polar winter-spring stratosphere have been detected. Increased upwelling in the tropical stratosphere has been found to be linked to changed wave driving at low latitudes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available