4.7 Article

Impact of Strong Tropical Volcanic Eruptions on ENSO Simulated in a Coupled GCM

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLIMATE
卷 26, 期 14, 页码 5169-5182

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00471.1

关键词

-

资金

  1. MEXT Japan
  2. MOE Japan [S10]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [22106005] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The impact of strong tropical volcanic eruptions (SVEs) on the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and its phase dependency is investigated using a coupled general circulation model (CGCM). This paper investigates the response of ENSO to an idealized SVE forcing, producing a peak perturbation of global-mean surface shortwave radiation larger than -6.5 W m(-2). Radiative forcing due to volcanic aerosols injected into the stratosphere induces tropical surface cooling around the volcanic forcing peak. Identical-twin forecast experiments of an ENSO-neutral year in response to an SVE forcing show an El Nino-like warming lagging one year behind the peak forcing. In addition to a reduced role of the mean subsurface water upwelling (known as the dynamical thermostat mechanism), the rapid land surface cooling around the Maritime Continent weakens the equatorial Walker circulation, contributing to the positive zonal gradient of sea surface temperature (SST) and precipitation anomalies over the equatorial Pacific. Since the warm and cold phases of ENSO exhibit significant asymmetry in their transition and duration, the impact of a SVE forcing on El Nino and La Nina is also investigated. In the warm phase of ENSO, the prediction skill of the SVE-forced experiments rapidly drops approximately six months after the volcanic peak. Since the SVE significantly facilitates the duration of El Nino, the following transition from warm to cold ENSO is disrupted. The impact of SVE forcing on La Nina is, however, relatively weak. These results imply that the intensity of a dynamical thermostat-like response to a SVE could be dependent on the phase of ENSO.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据