4.6 Article

Changes in the South Pacific Convergence Zone in IPCC AR4 future climate projections

期刊

CLIMATE DYNAMICS
卷 39, 期 1-2, 页码 1-19

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00382-011-1192-0

关键词

South Pacific Convergence Zone (SPCZ); Climate change; General circulation model; Climate variability

资金

  1. Pacific Climate Change Science Program (PCCSP)
  2. AusAID
  3. Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The response of the South Pacific Convergence Zone (SPCZ) to climate change is examined using simulations from 16 coupled climate models under the A2 emission scenario carried out for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report. Characteristics of the austral summer SPCZ in the late twenty-first century are compared with the late twentieth century: the orientation and latitude of the SPCZ precipitation band; the area and intensity of precipitation within the SPCZ; and the eastern extent of the SPCZ. Changes in the SPCZ position are examined using a simple linear fit to the band of maximum precipitation and using a pattern matching technique. Both techniques find no consistent shift in the slope or mean latitude of the austral summer SPCZ. However, many models simulate a westward shift in the eastern edge of the SPCZ in austral summer, with reduced precipitation to the east of around 150A degrees W. The westward contraction of the SPCZ is associated with a strengthening of the trade winds in the southeast Pacific and an increased zonal sea surface temperature gradient across the South Pacific. The majority of models simulate an increase in the area of the SPCZ and in mean and maximum precipitation within the SPCZ, defined by a 6 mm/day precipitation threshold, consistent with increased moisture convergence in a warmer climate. Changes in the SPCZ response to ENSO are examined using ENSO precipitation composites. The SPCZ has a reduced slope and is shifted towards the equator in the A2 multi-model mean El Nio composite.

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