From the “it’s worse than we modeled department”, a case of “head in the clouds” thinking:
From the University of Hawaii at Manoa via Eurekalert press release:
Study could mean greater anticipated global warming
Current state-of-the-art global climate models predict substantial warming in response to increases in greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. The models, though, disagree widely in the magnitude of the warming we can expect.
The disagreement among models is mainly due to the different representation of clouds. Some models predict that global mean cloud cover will increase in a warmer climate and the increased reflection of solar radiation will limit the predicted global warming. Other models predict reduced cloudiness and magnified warming.
In a paper that has just appeared in the Journal of Climate, researchers from the University of Hawaii Manoa (UHM) have assessed the performance of current global models in simulating clouds and have presented a new approach to determining the expected cloud feedbacks in a warmer climate.
Lead author Axel Lauer at the International Pacific Research Center (IPRC) at UHM notes, “All the global climate models we analyzed have serious deficiencies in simulating the properties of clouds in present-day climate. It is unfortunate that the global models’ greatest weakness may be in the one aspect that is most critical for predicting the magnitude of global warming.”
To study the clouds, the researchers applied a model representing only a limited region of the atmosphere over the eastern Pacific Ocean and adjacent land areas. The clouds in this region are known to greatly influence present climate, yet current global models do poorly in representing them. The regional model, developed at the IPRC, successfully simulates key features of the region’s present-day cloud fields, including the observed response of clouds to El Nino. Having evaluated the model’s simulation of present-day conditions, the researchers examined the response of simulated clouds in a warmer climate such as it might be in 100 years from now. The tendency for clouds to thin and cloud cover to reduce was more pronounced in this model than in any of the current global models.
NOTE: Believe it or not, but this pathetic little graph is all that was provided with the press release, I have found no larger versions – Anthony
UPDATE: Author Axel Lauer kindly sends me the paper link here
and from that I have a larger version of the graph below:
Co-author Kevin Hamilton concludes, “If our model results prove to be representative of the real global climate, then climate is actually more sensitive to perturbations by greenhouse gases than current global models predict, and even the highest warming predictions would underestimate the real change we could see.”
This research was supported by the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), by NASA through Grant NNX07AG53G, and by NOAA through Grant NA09OAR4320075, which sponsor research at the International Pacific Research Center. This research was also supported by NOAA/CPPA Grant NA07OAR4310257 and DOE Regional and Global Climate Modeling (RCGM) Program Grant ER64840.
Citation: Lauer, A., K. Hamilton, Y. Wang, V. T. Phillips, and R. Bennartz (2010), The Impact of Global Warming on Marine Boundary Layer Clouds over the Eastern Pacific – A Regional Model Study, Journal of Climate, Vol. 23, No. 21, 5844�.
Researcher Contacts: Axel Lauer (808) 956-3631; email: lauera@hawaii.edu
Kevin Hamilton (808) 956-8327; email: kph@hawaii.edu
IPRC Media Contact: Gisela Speidel, (808) 956-9252; email: gspeidel@hawaii.edu IPRC/SOEST, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1680 East-West Rd., POST Building 401, Honolulu, HI 96822.
The International Pacific Research Center (IPRC) of the School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST) at the University of Hawaii at Manoa is a climate research center founded to gain greater understanding of the climate system and the nature and causes of climate variation in the Asia-Pacific region and how global climate changes may affect the region. Established under the “U.S.-Japan Common Agenda for Cooperation in Global Perspective” in October 1997, the IPRC is a collaborative effort between agencies in Japan and the United States.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
With the current land/ocean configuration, cloud cover can only vary by a small percentage because direct sunlight (Total Sunshine Hours TSH) affects evaporation profoundly more than the measely 0.5 or 1DegC rise in temperature.
And it is cloud cover that governs TSH
I emailed Axel Lauer seeking a larger graphic and he was kind enough to provide a link to the original paper (PDF) which includes a larger graphics.
http://iprc.soest.hawaii.edu/users/kph/paper/2010jcliLaueretal.pdf
I haven’t had time to read the paper yet but thought I’d post it first for everyone’s benefit.
Steve
What predicts their playstation model for period 2002-2010? Because this is a reality.
http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/ihadcrut3_gl_2002:2011a.png
I would be interested in Dr Roy Spencer’s comments.
Of course, in the mean time (last 15 yrs), the real observed data shows far less warming than the current models would indicate. Yes, the models have problem, but the data shows the problem is in the opposite direction of what these authors would suggest.
Next climate warming report will be dramatically worse: UN
Robert Orr, UN under secretary general for planning, said the next Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report on global warming will be much worse than the last one.
http://tinyurl.com/3xmo2xg
And the connection with this finding and reality is?
Eurekalert has the large graphic here
There is a link from the press release to this page, where it says “Download this image file.”
REPLY: thanks, the author also sent me the image and paper. – Anthony
John Blake says:
November 23, 2010 at 11:15 am
Very well stated!
Should have said
“If our model results prove to be representative of the real global climate, then climate is actually more sensitive to perturbations by greenhouse gases than current global models predict, and even the highest warming predictions would underestimate the real change we could see.
But, since all of the current models already overstate warming when compared to real world observations; out new model is almost certainly total crap.”
Anthony,
Do you know if that EurekAlert link to that large graphic I mentioned is new? Or was it there before and you perhaps didn’t notice it? If it’s the latter, in the interest of accuracy, you should correct your statement that the small graphic was all that was provided with the press release.
But if Eurekalert added that large-format graphic link after your post, it would be an even more interesting story.
REPLY: I looked around for the graphic in several places, even doing a Google image search, so it may be new, though I can’t rule out that I might have missed it somehow. The problem seems to be that the graphic submitted has a bunch of whitespace around it, and that cause the posting program to shrink it. The graphic in the actual paper doesn’t have this problem. – Anthony
“Having evaluated the model’s simulation of present-day conditions, the researchers examined the response of simulated clouds in a warmer climate such as it might be in 100 years from now.”
So, as I understand it, they are simulating their assumptions in an assumed future climate. Brilliant!
If there hasn’t been any statistically significant warming since 1995 (Phil Jones assertion in an email wherein he states that if he published this he would be howled down by his colleagues and Trenberth’s lament that it is a travesty that there has been no warming in ten years) then surely this study is based on nothing. Or, perhaps they are saying that warming will be worse than it has been during the last 15 years of no warming. A good test would be to see if their new model ‘predicts’ the 15 year hiatus in warming.
Mt Taranaki (also formerly known as Mt Egmont) in New Zealand is a startling cone which is close to the idealised ‘proper’ volcano and similar in looks to Japan’s Mt Fujiama. The locals in the Taranaki region have a model that has been used for generations and puts the Climatologists in the U of Hawaii to shame. It’s totally reliable, too, as well as brief.
“If you can see the mountain it’s going to rain. If you CAN’T see the mountain, it IS raining.”
Aldous,
We mean no harm to your planet.
I note two weasel words :
“low level clouds”
” deviation from the average”
for comparing with data.
a) If you look in the IPCC report cloud cover estimates are all over the place and differ from data. They did not have the foresight to use an “anomaly” there too. One has to see the paper and check how well they fit the absolute values. Temperatures do not fit the data as was shown by Lucia , and I wonder where this new model falls on Lucia’s plot.
b) They talk of fitting low cloud cover. What about high cloud cover? The albedo that is?
“I don’t need somebody’s bomb making super computer to tell me that clouds ought to increase with temperature.”
Strangely they don’t seem to:
During the late 20th century warming spell global cloudiness decreased as did global albedo (reflectivity as seen from space) which is consistent with poleward shifting jets
but the Earthshine project now shows us that both global cloudiness and global
albedo are increasing again since the late 90s which is now coming to be seen as the start of a cooling period despite the recent warmth in the troposphere as some ocean heat content was discharged to the air.
http://bbso.njit.edu/Research/EarthShine/literature/Palle_etal_2006_EOS.pdf
So it may well be that jets shifting poleward reduces cloud cover to allow more energy into the oceans to cause warming.
The amount of cloud cover is not so much influenced by temperature as by the jetstream positioning. When the jets are pushed poleward the reduction in the circumference of the globe that the jets need to cover is reduced with less opprtunity for air mass mixing and so less clouds. When the jets shift equatorward lots more mixing and more clouds.
Anthony the link to the pper is busted. You need a dot before pdf. I downloaded it and couldn’t find the graphic anywhere in it. Warning. 12 meg download!
Went to their website looking for the money and found Masie somebody or other, US Representative from Hawaii, naturalized citizen of Japanese origin, Georgetown Law grad, and proposer of a $3,000,000 allocation of taxpayer funds to the IRPC. This was partially justified by the Japanese having allocated two million plus. So, these guys are probably down to their last 5 million or so and are desperate to make an impact. BTW, the funding proposal Masie wrote indicates there is an “applications” component to this research. Clues, anyone?
Went to their website looking for the money and found Masie somebody or other, US Representative from Hawaii, naturalized citizen of Japanese origin, Georgetown Law grad, and proposer of a $3,000,000 allocation of taxpayer funds to the IRPC. This was partially justified by the Japanese having allocated two million plus. So, these guys are probably down to their last 5 million or so and are 6 levels deep in the food chain, therefore desperate to make an impact. BTW, the funding proposal Masie wrote indicates there is an “applications” component to this research. Clues, anyone?
Also, another thing which struck me…
Isn’t it a bit odd to calibrate around El Niño /La Niña variations, which is a coupled sea surface and wind pattern phenomena, and then extrapolate to an increase of average temperature?
I’ve always wondered if these so called climate scienetists actually get out of their little offices and observe real weather. Where are the studies that show the rate of heat loss overnight depending on the location, time of year and cloud cover? that’s what we need
loved the seattle video!
that’s my old neighborhood, capitol hill.
and let me tell you, snow at thanksgiving in seattle is pretty unheard of.
such weather is rare even in dec/jan – maybe once every couple of years.
forecast low is 5f
Oi Vey!
Very interesting, and what makes this one area of clouds so special? Can I expect my temperature to drop in, say, the Sahara when the clouds in this area increase? Would not the clouds directly over top of me influence the ground temperature more? I am very interested to hear the justification for applying the effects/behavior of clouds in this one area to the entire planet.
From the Summary: The model results suggest that the
reduction in stratocumulus clouds (in the East Pacific) …. is caused by a drop in average inversion layer base height and a consequential decrease in cloud-top
height … because of global warming. Like in Timbuktu.