Impact of host climate model on contrail cirrus effective radiative forcing estimates
<p>Estimates of aviation effective radiative forcing (ERF) indicate that contrail cirrus is currently its largest contributor, although with a substantial associated uncertainty of <span class="inline-formula">∼</span> 70 %. Here, we implement the contrail parameterisatio...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |
| Online Access: | https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/473/2025/acp-25-473-2025.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841527582741233664 |
|---|---|
| author | W. Zhang K. Van Weverberg K. Van Weverberg K. Van Weverberg C. J. Morcrette C. J. Morcrette W. Feng W. Feng K. Furtado K. Furtado P. R. Field P. R. Field C.-C. Chen A. Gettelman P. M. Forster D. R. Marsh A. Rap |
| author_facet | W. Zhang K. Van Weverberg K. Van Weverberg K. Van Weverberg C. J. Morcrette C. J. Morcrette W. Feng W. Feng K. Furtado K. Furtado P. R. Field P. R. Field C.-C. Chen A. Gettelman P. M. Forster D. R. Marsh A. Rap |
| author_sort | W. Zhang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p>Estimates of aviation effective radiative forcing (ERF) indicate that contrail cirrus is currently its largest contributor, although with a substantial associated uncertainty of <span class="inline-formula">∼</span> 70 %. Here, we implement the contrail parameterisation developed for the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) in the UK Met Office Unified Model (UM), allowing us to compare, for the first time, the impact of key features of the host climate model on contrail cirrus ERF. We find that differences in background humidity between the models result in the UM-simulated contrail fractions being 2 to 3 times larger than in CAM. Additionally, the models show contrasting responses in overall global cloud fraction, with contrails increasing the total cloud fraction in the UM and decreasing it in CAM. Differences in the complexity of the cloud microphysics schemes lead to significant differences in simulated changes to cloud ice water content due to aviation. After compensating for the unrealistically low contrail optical depth in the UM, we estimate the 2018 contrail cirrus ERF to be 40.8 mW m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>−2</sup></span> in the UM, compared to 60.1 mW m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>−2</sup></span> in CAM. These values highlight the substantial uncertainty in contrail cirrus ERF due to differences in microphysics and radiation schemes between the two models. We also find a factor-of-8 uncertainty in contrail cirrus ERF due to existing uncertainty in contrail cirrus optical depth. Future research should focus on better representing microphysical and radiative contrail characteristics in climate models and on improved observational constraints.</p> |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-10c7adafaf0c41a8993c2e25ecbde067 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1680-7316 1680-7324 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Copernicus Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |
| spelling | doaj-art-10c7adafaf0c41a8993c2e25ecbde0672025-01-15T12:50:07ZengCopernicus PublicationsAtmospheric Chemistry and Physics1680-73161680-73242025-01-012547348910.5194/acp-25-473-2025Impact of host climate model on contrail cirrus effective radiative forcing estimatesW. Zhang0K. Van Weverberg1K. Van Weverberg2K. Van Weverberg3C. J. Morcrette4C. J. Morcrette5W. Feng6W. Feng7K. Furtado8K. Furtado9P. R. Field10P. R. Field11C.-C. Chen12A. Gettelman13P. M. Forster14D. R. Marsh15A. Rap16School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UKDepartment of Geography, Ghent University, Ghent, BelgiumMeteorological and Climatological Research Unit, Royal Meteorological Institute of Belgium, Brussels, BelgiumMet Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UKMet Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UKDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Exeter University, Exeter, EX4 4QE, UKSchool of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UKNational Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9PH, UKMet Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UKCentre for Climate Research Singapore, Meteorological Service Singapore, 537054, SingaporeSchool of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UKMet Office, Exeter, EX1 3PB, UKNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USAPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USASchool of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UKSchool of Physics and Astronomy, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UKSchool of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK<p>Estimates of aviation effective radiative forcing (ERF) indicate that contrail cirrus is currently its largest contributor, although with a substantial associated uncertainty of <span class="inline-formula">∼</span> 70 %. Here, we implement the contrail parameterisation developed for the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) in the UK Met Office Unified Model (UM), allowing us to compare, for the first time, the impact of key features of the host climate model on contrail cirrus ERF. We find that differences in background humidity between the models result in the UM-simulated contrail fractions being 2 to 3 times larger than in CAM. Additionally, the models show contrasting responses in overall global cloud fraction, with contrails increasing the total cloud fraction in the UM and decreasing it in CAM. Differences in the complexity of the cloud microphysics schemes lead to significant differences in simulated changes to cloud ice water content due to aviation. After compensating for the unrealistically low contrail optical depth in the UM, we estimate the 2018 contrail cirrus ERF to be 40.8 mW m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>−2</sup></span> in the UM, compared to 60.1 mW m<span class="inline-formula"><sup>−2</sup></span> in CAM. These values highlight the substantial uncertainty in contrail cirrus ERF due to differences in microphysics and radiation schemes between the two models. We also find a factor-of-8 uncertainty in contrail cirrus ERF due to existing uncertainty in contrail cirrus optical depth. Future research should focus on better representing microphysical and radiative contrail characteristics in climate models and on improved observational constraints.</p>https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/473/2025/acp-25-473-2025.pdf |
| spellingShingle | W. Zhang K. Van Weverberg K. Van Weverberg K. Van Weverberg C. J. Morcrette C. J. Morcrette W. Feng W. Feng K. Furtado K. Furtado P. R. Field P. R. Field C.-C. Chen A. Gettelman P. M. Forster D. R. Marsh A. Rap Impact of host climate model on contrail cirrus effective radiative forcing estimates Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |
| title | Impact of host climate model on contrail cirrus effective radiative forcing estimates |
| title_full | Impact of host climate model on contrail cirrus effective radiative forcing estimates |
| title_fullStr | Impact of host climate model on contrail cirrus effective radiative forcing estimates |
| title_full_unstemmed | Impact of host climate model on contrail cirrus effective radiative forcing estimates |
| title_short | Impact of host climate model on contrail cirrus effective radiative forcing estimates |
| title_sort | impact of host climate model on contrail cirrus effective radiative forcing estimates |
| url | https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/473/2025/acp-25-473-2025.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT wzhang impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT kvanweverberg impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT kvanweverberg impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT kvanweverberg impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT cjmorcrette impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT cjmorcrette impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT wfeng impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT wfeng impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT kfurtado impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT kfurtado impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT prfield impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT prfield impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT ccchen impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT agettelman impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT pmforster impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT drmarsh impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates AT arap impactofhostclimatemodeloncontrailcirruseffectiveradiativeforcingestimates |