Internal variability in simulated and observed tropical tropospheric temperature trends

Abstract

We explore the extent to which internal variability can reconcile discrepancies between observed and simulated warming in the upper tropical troposphere. We compare all extant radiosonde‐based estimates for the period 1958–2014 to simulations from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 multimodel ensemble and the 100 realization Max Planck Institute large ensemble. We consider annual mean temperatures and all available 30‐and 15‐year trends. Most observed trends fall within the ensemble spread for most of the record, and trends calculated over 15‐year periods show better agreement than 30‐year trends, with generally larger discrepancies for the older observational products. The simulated amplification of surface warming aloft in the troposphere is consistent with observations, and the linear correlation between surface and simultaneous tropospheric warming trends decreases with trend length. We conclude that trend differences between observations and simulations of tropical tropospheric temperatures are dominated by observational uncertainty and chaotic internal variability rather than by systematic errors in model performance.

The Max Planck Institute Grand Ensemble: Enabling the Exploration of Climate System Variability

“…The utility of MPI‐GE itself has also been demonstrated in previous studies (Bittner et al, ; Bengtsson & Hodges, ; Dessler et al, ; Hedemann et al, ; Li & Ilyina, ; Manzini et al, ; Maher et al, ; Marotzke, ; Niederdrenk & Notz, ; Plesca et al, ; Rädel et al, ; Stevens, ; Suárez‐Gutiérrez et al, , ; Zhang et al, ). Some high‐profile examples include the investigation into the 1998–2012 hiatus and extreme events; for example, Hedemann et al () used MPI‐GE to investigate the recent surface warming hiatus.…”

Arctic Sea Ice in a 1.5°C Warmer World

“…The performance of the CMIP5 model version has been evaluated against observational records for the atmosphere (Giorgetta et al, 2013), the ocean , and sea ice , and the Grand Ensemble simulations have been analyzed in recent studies (e.g., Bittner et al, 2016;Hedemann et al, 2017;Stevens, 2015;Suárez-Gutiérrez et al, 2017). The simulations are carried out with model version 1.1, which is an updated version of the model version used for Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5).…”

“…The placement of the ocean model grid poles over Greenland and Antarctica leads to a horizontal resolution of 10 to 50 km in the Arctic Ocean. The performance of the CMIP5 model version has been evaluated against observational records for the atmosphere (Giorgetta et al, 2013), the ocean , and sea ice , and the Grand Ensemble simulations have been analyzed in recent studies (e.g., Bittner et al, 2016;Hedemann et al, 2017;Stevens, 2015;Suárez-Gutiérrez et al, 2017).…”

Internal variability in European summer temperatures at 1.5 °C and 2 °C of global warming

“…A key factor in evaluating the differences between the climates for the two targets is to consider the magnitude of the response in the Earth's climate to half a degree more of warming relative to the signal of internal variability. For this purpose, large ensembles of simulations based on the same coupled climate models (like the experiments described in Deser et al 2012, Kay et al 2015, Rodgers et al 2015, Fyfe et al 2017and Suárez-Gutiérrez et al 2017 are the best available tools, because they provide unambiguous characterisations of the simulated internal variability in a changing climate without being confounded by different model configurations. The MPI-ESM Grand Ensemble has 100 independent realizations, which start from different times of a preindustrial control run but are driven by the same external forcings, and is currently the largest existing ensemble from a fully-coupled Earth System Model.…”