4.6 Article

Increase in the skewness of extratropical vertical velocities with climate warming: fully nonlinear simulations versus moist baroclinic instability

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/qj.3195

关键词

skewness; vertical velocity; non-Gaussian; moist baroclinic instability; diabatic Rossby vortex; diabatic Rossby wave; effective static stability; climate change

资金

  1. NSF [AGS 1148594]
  2. NCAR's Computational and Information Systems Laboratory
  3. Natural Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) [RGPIN-2014-05416]
  4. Compute Canada allocation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The distribution of vertical velocities in the extratropical troposphere is skewed such that upward motions are faster than downward motions. This skewness is important for the intensity distribution of precipitation and for the effective static stability experienced by moist eddies. We show here that the skewness of the vertical velocity increases in magnitude as the climate warms in simulations with an idealized general circulation model (GCM), except in very warm climates. That the skewness increases with warming is consistent with studies of moist baroclinic instability which suggest that the area of updraughts should contract as the stratification approaches moist neutrality in warm climates. However, the increase in skewness with warming is much weaker in the fully nonlinear simulations as compared to what is found for unstable modes of moist baroclinic instability in the same GCM. Nonlinear equilibration to a macroturbulent state leads to a reduction in skewness in warm climates. Therefore, while the unstable modes may be relevant for some cases of cyclogenesis, they overestimate the effect of warming on the skewness of the overall distribution of the vertical velocity. Remarkably, the most unstable mode transitions from a quasi-periodic wave to an isolated diabatic Rossby vortex at sufficiently high temperatures, with possible implications for fast-growing disturbances in warm climates.

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

4.6
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