TY - JOUR
T1 - Northern Hemisphere Stratosphere-Troposphere Circulation Change in CMIP6 Models
T2 - 2. Mechanisms and Sources of the Spread
AU - Karpechko, Alexey Yu
AU - Wu, Zheng
AU - Simpson, Isla R.
AU - Kretschmer, Marlene
AU - Afargan-Gerstman, Hilla
AU - Butler, Amy H.
AU - Domeisen, Daniela I.V.
AU - Garny, Hella
AU - Lawrence, Zachary
AU - Manzini, Elisa
AU - Sigmond, Michael
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024. The Author(s).
PY - 2024/7/16
Y1 - 2024/7/16
N2 - We analyze the sources for spread in the response of the Northern Hemisphere wintertime stratospheric polar vortex (SPV) to global warming in Climate Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) and Phase 6 (CMIP6) model projections. About half of the intermodel spread in SPV projections by CMIP6 models, but less than a third in CMIP5 models, can be attributed to the intermodel spread in stationary planetary wave driving. In CMIP6, SPV weakening is mostly driven by increased upward wave flux from the troposphere, while SPV strengthening is associated with increased equatorward wave propagation away from the polar stratosphere. We test hypothesized factors contributing to changes in the upward and equatorward planetary wave fluxes and show that an across-model regression using projected global warming rates, strengthening of the subtropical jet and basic state lower stratospheric wind biases as predictors can explain nearly the same fraction in the CMIP6 SPV spread as the planetary wave driving (r = 0.67). The dependence of the SPV spread on the model biases in the basic state winds offers a possible emergent constraint; however, a large uncertainty prevents a substantial reduction of the projected SPV spread. The lack of this dependence in CMIP5 further calls for better understanding of underlying causes. Our results improve understanding of projected SPV uncertainty; however, further narrowing of the uncertainty remains challenging.
AB - We analyze the sources for spread in the response of the Northern Hemisphere wintertime stratospheric polar vortex (SPV) to global warming in Climate Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) and Phase 6 (CMIP6) model projections. About half of the intermodel spread in SPV projections by CMIP6 models, but less than a third in CMIP5 models, can be attributed to the intermodel spread in stationary planetary wave driving. In CMIP6, SPV weakening is mostly driven by increased upward wave flux from the troposphere, while SPV strengthening is associated with increased equatorward wave propagation away from the polar stratosphere. We test hypothesized factors contributing to changes in the upward and equatorward planetary wave fluxes and show that an across-model regression using projected global warming rates, strengthening of the subtropical jet and basic state lower stratospheric wind biases as predictors can explain nearly the same fraction in the CMIP6 SPV spread as the planetary wave driving (r = 0.67). The dependence of the SPV spread on the model biases in the basic state winds offers a possible emergent constraint; however, a large uncertainty prevents a substantial reduction of the projected SPV spread. The lack of this dependence in CMIP5 further calls for better understanding of underlying causes. Our results improve understanding of projected SPV uncertainty; however, further narrowing of the uncertainty remains challenging.
KW - atmospheric dynamics
KW - climate change
KW - climate models
KW - polar vortex
KW - stratosphere
KW - stratosphere-troposphere coupling
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85197546804
U2 - 10.1029/2024JD040823
DO - 10.1029/2024JD040823
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85197546804
SN - 2169-897X
VL - 129
JO - Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
JF - Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
IS - 13
M1 - e2024JD040823
ER -