The validity of climate models: a bibliography

A reader sent me some correspondence he had received from the Met Office. He had been enquiring about what evidence Prof Slingo et al had of the validity of the output of GCMs, and received in return the following bibliography:

Airey MJ, Hulme M, Johns TC (1996) Evaluation of simulations of terrestrial precipitation in UK Met Office/Hadley Centre climate change experiments. Geophysical Research Letters 23:1657-1660

Allan RP, Ramaswamy V, Slingo A (2002) Diagnostic analysis of atmospheric moisture and clear-sky radiative feedback in the Hadley Centre and Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) climate models. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres 107:7

Allan RP, Ringer MA, Slingo A (2003) Evaluation of moisture in the Hadley Centre climate model using simulations of HIRS water-vapour channel radiances. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 129:3371-3389

Arritt RW, Goering DC, Anderson CJ (2000) The North American monsoon system in the Hadley Centre coupled ocean-atmosphere GCM. Geophysical Research Letters 27:565-568

Bellouin N, Jones A, Haywood J, Christopher SA (2008) Updated estimate of aerosol direct radiative forcing from satellite observations and comparison against the Hadley Centre climate model. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres 113:15

Bodas-Salcedo A, Ringer MA, Jones A (2008) Evaluation of the surface radiation budget in the atmospheric component of the Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model (HadGEM1). Journal of Climate 21:4723-4748

Collins M (2000) The El Nino-Southern Oscillation in the second Hadley Centre coupled model and its response to greenhouse warming. Journal of Climate 13:1299-1312

Collins M, Tett SFB, Cooper C (2001) The internal climate variability of HadCM3, a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments. Climate Dynamics 17:61-81

Collins WJ, Bellouin N, Doutriaux-Boucher M, Gedney N, Halloran P, Hinton T, Hughes J, Jones CD, Joshi M, Liddicoat S, Martin G, O'Connor F, Rae J, Senior C, Sitch S, Totterdell I, Wiltshire A, Woodward S (2011) Development and evaluation of an Earth-System model-HadGEM2. Geoscientific Model Development 4:1051-1075

Cooper C, Gordon C (2002) North Atlantic oceanic decadal variability in the Hadley Centre coupled model. Journal of Climate 15:45-72

Corte-Real J, Qian B, Xu H (1999) Circulation patterns, daily precipitation in Portugal and implications for climate change simulated by the second Hadley Centre GCM. Climate Dynamics 15:921-935

Cusack S, Slingo A, Edwards JM, Wild M (1998) The radiative impact of a simple aerosol climatology on the Hadley Centre atmospheric GCM. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 124:2517-2526

Gordon C, Cooper C, Senior CA, Banks H, Gregory JM, Johns TC, Mitchell JFB, Wood RA (2000) The simulation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports in a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments. Climate Dynamics 16:147-168

Hardiman SC, Butchart N, Osprey SM, Gray LJ, Bushell AC, Hinton TJ (2010) The Climatology of the Middle Atmosphere in a Vertically Extended Version of the Met Office's Climate Model. Part I: Mean State. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 67:1509-1525

Hewitt HT, Copsey D, Culverwell ID, Harris CM, Hill RSR, Keen AB, McLaren AJ, Hunke EC (2010) Design and implementation of the infrastructure of HadGEM3: the next-generation Met Office climate modelling system. Geoscientific Model Development 3:1861-1937

Hewitt HT, Copsey D, Culverwell ID, Harris CM, Hill RSR, Keen AB, McLaren AJ, Hunke EC (2011) Design and implementation of the infrastructure of HadGEM3: the next-generation Met Office climate modelling system. Geoscientific Model Development 4:223-253

Inness PM, Gregory D (1997) Aspects of the intraseasonal oscillation simulated by the Hadley Centre Atmosphere Model. Climate Dynamics 13:441-458

James PM (2006) An assessment of European synoptic variability in Hadley Centre Global Environmental models based on an objective classification of weather regimes. Climate Dynamics 27:215-231

Johns TC, Durman CF, Banks HT, Roberts MJ, McLaren AJ, Ridley JK, Senior CA, Williams KD, Jones A, Rickard GJ, Cusack S, Ingram WJ, Crucifix M, Sexton DMH, Joshi MM, Dong BW, Spencer H, Hill RSR, Gregory JM, Keen AB, Pardaens AK, Lowe JA, Bodas-Salcedo A, Stark S, Searl Y (2006) The new Hadley Centre Climate Model (HadGEM1): Evaluation of coupled simulations. Journal of Climate 19:1327-1353

Jones PD, Hulme M, Briffa KR, Jones CG, Mitchell JFB, Murphy JM (1996) Summer moisture availability over Europe in the Hadley Centre general circulation model based on the Palmer Drought Severity Index. International Journal of Climatology 16:155-172

Joshi MM, Webb MJ, Maycock AC, Collins M (2010) Stratospheric water vapour and high climate sensitivity in a version of the HadSM3 climate model. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 10:7161-7167

Martin GM, Bellouin N, Collins WJ, Culverwell ID, Halloran PR, Hardiman SC, Hinton TJ, Jones CD, McDonald RE, McLaren AJ, O'Connor FM, Roberts MJ, Rodriguez JM, Woodward S, Best MJ, Brooks ME, Brown AR, Butchart N, Dearden C, Derbyshire SH, Dharssi I, Doutriaux-Boucher M, Edwards JM, Falloon PD, Gedney N, Gray LJ, Hewitt HT, Hobson M, Huddleston MR, Hughes J, Ineson S, Ingram WJ, James PM, Johns TC, Johnson CE, Jones A, Jones CP, Joshi MM, Keen AB, Liddicoat S, Lock AP, Maidens AV, Manners JC, Milton SF, Rae JGL, Ridley JK, Sellar A, Senior CA, Totterdell IJ, Verhoef A, Vidale PL, Wiltshire A, Had GEMDT (2011) The HadGEM2 family of Met Office Unified Model climate configurations. Geoscientific Model Development 4:723-757

Martin GM, Ringer MA, Pope VD, Jones A, Dearden C, Hinton TJ (2006) The physical properties of the atmosphere in the new Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model (HadGEM1). Part I: Model description and global climatology. Journal of Climate 19:1274-1301

Osprey SM, Gray LJ, Hardiman SC, Butchart N, Bushell AC, Hinton TJ (2010) The Climatology of the Middle Atmosphere in a Vertically Extended Version of the Met Office's Climate Model Part II: Variability. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 67:3637-3651

Pope VD, Gallani ML, Rowntree PR, Stratton RA (2000) The impact of new physical parametrizations in the Hadley Centre climate model: HadAM3. Climate Dynamics 16:123-146

Pope VD, Pamment JA, Jackson DR, Slingo A (2001) The representation of water vapor and its dependence on vertical resolution in the Hadley Centre Climate Model. Journal of Climate 14:3065-3085

Ringer MA, Martin GM, Greeves CZ, Hinton TJ, James PM, Pope VD, Scaife AA, Stratton RA, Inness PM, Slingo JM, Yang GY (2006) The physical properties of the atmosphere in the new Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model (HadGEM1). Part II: Aspects of variability and regional climate. Journal of Climate 19:1302-1326

Slingo A, Pamment JA, Allan RP, Wilson PS (2000) Water vapor feedbacks in the ECMWF reanalyses and Hadley Centre climate model. Journal of Climate 13:3080-3098

Spencer H, Sutton RT, Slingo JM, Roberts M, Black E (2005) Indian Ocean climate and dipole variability in Hadley Centre coupled GCMs. Journal of Climate 18:2286-2307

Stratton RA (1999) A high resolution AMIP integration using the Hadley Centre model HadAM2b. Climate Dynamics 15:9-28

Turner J, Connolley WM, Lachlan-Cope TA, Marshall GJ (2006) The performance of the Hadley Centre climate model (HADCM3) in high southern latitudes. International Journal of Climatology 26:91-112

Walters DN, Best MJ, Bushell AC, Copsey D, Edwards JM, Falloon PD, Harris CM, Lock AP, Manners JC, Morcrette CJ, Roberts MJ, Stratton RA, Webster S, Wilkinson JM, Willett MR, Boutle IA, Earnshaw PD, Hill PG, MacLachlan C, Martin GM, Moufouma-Okia W, Palmer MD, Petch JC, Rooney GG, Scaife AA, Williams KD (2011) The Met Office Unified Model Global Atmosphere 3.0/3.1 and JULES Global Land 3.0/3.1 configurations. Geoscientific Model Development 4:919-941

Wang KY, Shallcross DE (2005) Simulation of the Taiwan climate using the Hadley Centre PRECIS regional climate modeling system: The 1979-1981 results. Terrestrial Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences 16:1017-1043

Webb M, Senior C, Bony S, Morcrette JJ (2001) Combining ERBE and ISCCP data to assess clouds in the Hadley Centre, ECMWF and LMD atmospheric climate models. Climate Dynamics 17:905-922

Woodward S (2001) Modeling the atmospheric life cycle and radiative impact of mineral dust in the Hadley Centre climate model. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres 106:18155-18166

Perhaps readers would like to pick a title at random and see how much comfort it gives.

Comments

[Gareth]

Roger,

If I have understood it correctly, in the Manners et al. 2009 paper mentioned in that section the Met Office found that they can achieve reasonable results (relatively speaking) without having to calculate solar zenith angle related radiation every 15 minutes. If they calculate an average for each three hour period and adjust the values up or down as appropriate for the shorter intermediate time periods it doesn't introduce too many errors *compared to the thorough way* but does save on processing power.

[thinkingscientist]

Gareth: thanks for the link to that paper, its really interesting as of late I have been getting interested in the radiative physics arguments.

[Gareth]

Looking at

Jones PD, Hulme M, Briffa KR, Jones CG, Mitchell JFB, Murphy JM (1996) Summer moisture availability over Europe in the Hadley Centre general circulation model based on the Palmer Drought Severity Index. International Journal of Climatology 16:155-172

This paper from some familiar figures compares a control simulation with a static CO2 level versus a perturbed simulation where CO2 levels start at 323ppm and compound 1% a year and then attempts to compare them with real world observations.

From the Abstract:

Variability on time-scales beyond 20 years is absent in the various model area-average, principal component (PC) and rotated principal component (RPC) time series.

...

The perturbed integration shows a dramatic change to drought conditions affecting most of Europe by year 75. In some regions the PDSI quickly approaches (within 30-40 years) severe drought values of -3 to -4 before stabilizing at this level until year 75, but in a few areas little change in drought severity is seen.

And later in the paper:

The control simulation reveals some year-to-year variability, but little on time-scales longer than decadal. This is in marked contrast to the ‘real-world’ observations over 1892-1991, which contained major oscillations between dry and wet periods lasting up to several decades (see Briffa et al., 1994, their figure 2).

The time frame of the modeling is from CO2 levels starting at 323ppm going forward 75 years. CO2 levels passed 323ppm before 1970. 30 to 40 years ahead would be now. Although CO2 levels have not grown quite at the rate they do in the perturbed model I do not see Europe beset by severe drought conditions seemingly without end.(And even if we were the policy response of only seeking to use less water does not fit with what the models tend to suggest. Warmer world = wetter and more extreme precipitation. The policy response should include reservoirs to store more of that rainfall and to protect against flooding but it doesn't.)

From the introduction:

The PDSI is well suited to GCM validation because it expresses regional moisture supply, standardized in relation to local climatological norms. Because the index does not represent drought in absolute terms, it should not be vital that the control simulation climatologies for temperature and precipitation will be in error compared
with reality.

Despite what that says I find it hard to consider the process described in this paper as a validation of the model. I am undecided if this means they actually think this is validation or they are just saying PDSI *could* be useful for validation. The control simulation does not attempt to replicate the real world as CO2 levels have not been static. The perturbed model does not replicate the real world either as CO2 levels approached 700ppm by the end of the model run. The model runs were calculated on a differently sized grid to those of the observations and the computer data was then interpolated to fit the sizing of the observation grid. Perhaps unsurprisingly they only find a weak relationship between reality and the model output.

Something I didn't spot first time around but did while looking back through the paper is this:

The control integration has CO2 set to 323 ppmv (parts per million by
volume). The perturbed integration began with this value, which was then increased each year by 1 per cent, compounded. In this perturbed experiment the C02 concentration doubles its initial value during year 70. In both control and transient integrations, flux corrections have been applied in an attempt to prevent climate drift. Global-mean temperatures in the control integration do drift, however, increasing by 0.8"C by the final year. Most of this increase occurs in the Southern Hemisphere (Murphy, 1995, his figure 21), and the European region is affected only slightly (see later). As both the control and perturbed integrations began with the same initial conditions the drift is a potentially important contribution to the difference (i.e. the climate change) between the two experiments.

The GCM control simulation with a static CO2 level warmed by itself despite corrections to try and prevent it. Also, it warmed in a manner opposite to the observed world - The southern hemisphere has warmed less than the northern hemisphere I think. IMO this demonstrates how poorly the models were performing at a time when models were being used as the basis for global warming scaremongering.

We had available years 1 to 75 of the control integration and years 21 to 75 of the perturbed. Archival problems affected many months in the first 20 years of the perturbed simulation.

:o

[eSmiff]

I am happy to accept an estimate of climate sensitivity as long as it's zero. :-)

http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/08/05/new-paper-finds-climate-sensitivity-to-co2-is-close-to-zero-study-finds-there-is-no-agreement-between-observations-and-climate-model-predictions-during-the-last-two-decades-of-the-20th-centur/

New paper finds climate sensitivity to CO2 is 'close to zero'

A new peer-reviewed paper published in Energy & Environment finds there is no agreement between observations and climate model predictions during the last two decades of the 20th century. According to the author, "This finding is shown to put constraints on surface [temperature] trend and Climate Sensitivity, limiting them to values close to zero." The paper adds to several other peer-reviewed publications finding the IPCC estimates of climate sensitivity to CO2 are greatly exaggerated.

[Gareth]

I forgot a link to the Jones paper. You can get it from here

[Roger Longstaff]

Gareth,

Thank you for your sterling work on this! The Manners paper (table 2 p.464) says it all to me - a reduction in the radiation integration step from 3 hours to 15 minutes shows a mean error in the 3 hour results of 15Wm^-2 for SW and 4 Wm^-2 for LW. IMHO even 15 minutes is too long to obtain an accurate spatial / temporal map of temperature (which drives the other thermodynamic processes of conduction, convection and phase change). And all this is supposed to detect an AGW signal of order 1 Wm^2 !!

There is a simple test that could validate, or otherwise, their radiation calculation. We have a complete temperature map of the Moon, courtesy of the NASA Diviner space experiment, and we know its' average surface temperature. If the Met Office applied their radiation calculation to the Moon (correcting for rotation, albedo and surface thermal conductivity) they would be able to validate, or otherwise, their methodology. I estimate the work would take about 1 month and cost about £10k.