One of the most basic meteorological factors isn’t handled by climate models – and they run off in a “hockey stick” style.
From the UNIVERSITY OF LINCOLN
Climate models fail to simulate recent air-pressure changes over Greenland
Climatologists may be unable to accurately predict regional climate change over the North Atlantic because computer model simulations have failed to accurately include air pressure changes that have taken place in the Greenland region over the last three decades.
This deficiency may mean regional climate predictions for the UK and parts of Europe could be inaccurate, according to new research published today.
Researchers compared real data with simulation data over a 30 year period and found that the simulations on average showed slightly decreasing air pressure in the Greenland region, when in fact, the real data showed a significant increase in high air pressure – or so-called ‘Greenland blocking’ – during the summer months. These simulations are widely used by climate scientists worldwide as a basis for predicting future climate change.
The findings raise serious questions about the accuracy of regional climate projections in the UK and neighbouring parts of Europe because meteorological conditions in those regions are closely linked to air-pressure changes over Greenland.
Researchers warn that record wet summers in England and Wales such as those experienced in 2007 and 2012 could become more frequent if Greenland air pressure continues to strengthen over the next few decades, but such a trend might not be predicted due to inaccurate regional climate simulations.
The study, carried out by the University of Lincoln, UK, and the University of Liège in Belgium, also concluded that current models of melting on the Greenland Ice Sheet – a vast body of ice which covers more than 80 per cent of the surface of Greenland – may significantly underestimate the global sea-level rise expected by 2100.
Professor Edward Hanna led the study with Dr Richard Hall, both from the University of Lincoln’s School of Geography, and Dr Xavier Fettweis of University of Liège. Professor Hanna said: “These differences between the estimates from the current climate models and observations suggests that the models cannot accurately represent recent conditions or predict future changes in Greenland climate.
“While there is natural variability in the climate system, we think that the recent rapid warming over Greenland since the early 1990s is not being fully simulated by the models, and that this misrepresentation could mean that future changes in atmospheric circulation and the jet stream over the wider North Atlantic region may not be properly simulated.
“Until now, no-one has systematically examined the projections to see how they represent the last few decades and future changes – up to the year 2100 – from a Greenland regional perspective. Previous work reported a tendency for global warming to result in a slightly more active jet stream in the atmosphere over the North Atlantic by 2100 but our results indicate we may actually see a somewhat weaker jet, at least in summer.”
The research is the first to systematically compare global climate model data and observational data of air pressure changes for the Greenland region. The study, Recent changes in summer Greenland blocking captured by none of the CMIP5 models has been published in the European Geosciences Union journal, The Cryosphere.
###
The paper:
Brief communication: Recent changes in summer Greenland blocking captured by none of the CMIP5 models
Edward Hanna et al.
Abstract. Recent studies note a significant increase in highpressure blocking over the Greenland region (Greenland Blocking Index, GBI) in summer since the 1990s. Such a general circulation change, indicated by a negative trend in the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) index, is generally highlighted as a major driver of recent surface melt records observed on the Greenland Ice Sheet (GrIS). Here we compare reanalysis-based GBI records with those from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5 (CMIP5) suite of global climate models over 1950–2100. We find that the recent summer GBI increase lies well outside the range of modelled past reconstructions and future GBI projections (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The models consistently project a future decrease in GBI (linked to an increase in NAO), which highlights a likely key deficiency of current climate models if the recently observed circulation changes continue to persist. Given well-established connections between atmospheric pressure over the Greenland region and air temperature and precipitation extremes downstream, e.g. over northwest Europe, this brings into question the accuracy of simulated North Atlantic jet stream changes and resulting climatological anomalies over densely populated regions of northern Europe as well as of future projections of GrIS mass balance produced using global and regional climate models.
Open access downloads:
- Final revised paper (published on 16 Oct 2018)
- Supplement to the final revised paper
- Discussion paper (published on 15 May 2018)
- Supplement to the discussion paper
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

corrected northeast –> northwest:
Determining for the weather of the UK and continental Europe are the Azores high, west of North Africa, and Iceland deep, northwest of the UK.
the respective locations can be seen 10> <days around dormouse day ( Siebenschläfertag ).
This year the Iceland low is closer to Ireland and the UK.
The Azores high is closer to Africa and just south of the Azores.
gives:
– Constantly warm, dusty air from the Sahara that absorbs moisture above the Mediterranean, raining off while ascending the Alps and invading Central Europe as a dry "Foehn".
– Constantly cold air from the northwest taking off moisture over the warm Gulf Stream.
– where the two meet: hailstorm + ongoing heavy rains.
It stays that way until the next dormouse day.
__________________________________________________
has nothing to do with climate change – that's weather!
__________________________________________________
hope you can cope with my dinglish
Johann, your ginglish is just fine.
Wunderbar, Wundersamer!
“Dormouse day”? Not certain if this refers to putting dormice in teapots or extracting them. Or freshly roasted dormice as per QE1’s feasts.
Perhaps someone could explain?
It’s the German version of the US Groundhog Day and a parallel to the English St Swithin’s Day
As long as I have known, the weather models have been notoriously poor at forecasting the pressure over Greenland. They seldom properly represent the Greenland high pressure area. Now that hand analysis is pretty much a lost art, I suspect many meteorologists do not even look at the actually Greenland pressure pattern.
Another question: How do models calculate volcanic activity? Especially undersea?
The models do not calculate volcanic activity , solar activity ,geo magnetic field strength in other words they do not calculate the items that influence the climate therefore they are USELESS!
In the meantime the global temperatures continue in a down trend. It is unfortunate we had a rise in overall oceanic sea surface temperatures but that seems to be subsiding some after a rapid blip up or at least I hope it was just a blip.
El Nino not looking nearly as healthy as it was even as recently as a week ago. SOI INDEX should hold positive territory for at least the next week or so. I think -8 is the El Nino threshold which I say is 100% sure to hold over the next week
As the magnetic fields continue to weaken and the duration of time lengthens I think this is going to translate more and more into a more dynamic effect upon the climate through an increase in major volcanic activity, global snow, cloud coverage increasing , overall oceanic sea surface temperatures cooling and a more meridional atmospheric circulation pattern.
The thing that I can’t quantify is the magnetic threshold levels of weakness needed which would translate into a more dynamic effect upon the climate. However, I know it is out there.
Let me try an analogy, I do not know if this is good or not, but say we are new to this planet and saw water in a liquid state for the first time. Say someone comes along and said if this liquid water gets cold enough it is going to reach a threshold level and turn into a solid substance. So the water starts to cool but nothing dramatic happens and the person that predicted something would happen to the water says it will happen but the threshold levels(32f) have not been reached yet. Everyone doubts it because it has not happened . He says in vain (he is right but does not know it) but the threshold level is out there.
I think that is similar to what I am saying about the weakening magnetic fields , yes they are weakening but not to much has happened because the threshold levels have yet to be attained.
The Earth’s magnetic field and the magnetic field of the solar wind influence the velocity and circulation of jet currents from 500 hPa upwards.
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/500hPa/orthographic=-332.15,81.82,390
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/70hPa/orthographic=-332.15,81.82,390
http://sol.spacenvironment.net/raps_ops/current_files/rtimg/cutoff.gif
Ren do you see where I am coming from in my previous post? Do you think the threshold levels are out there? If you do how close are we? Do you agree with my premise?
The current solar minimum will last until 2020. I think that we will face a weak solar cycle.
When the solar wind is weak, the circulation of the jet streams is close to the distribution of the magnetic field in the Arctic.
http://www.geomag.nrcan.gc.ca/images/field/fnor.gif
http://www.geomag.nrcan.gc.ca/mag_fld/arctics-en.php
Ren do you have any very recent data on the geo magnetic field strength? I can’t find anything recent.
Changes in Earth’s magnetic field from January to June 2014 as measured by the Swarm constellation of satellites. These changes are based on the magnetic signals that stem from Earth’s core. Shades of red represent areas of strengthening, while blues show areas of weakening over the 6-month period.
https://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2014/06/Magnetic_field_changes
Transport of the cosmic ray particles – GCR and SEP – through the magnetosphere is estimated using the CISM-Dartmouth particle trajectory geomagnetic cutoff rigidity code.
http://sol.spacenvironment.net/raps_ops/current_files/Cutoff.html
thanks
Currently high above Greenland, and lows they are moving over Iceland.

You get hockey sticks because the predictions are all linear and based on the last observation. If there was an upward trend, all future predictions will be upward. Likewise a downward trend.
Or like Trump said, it’s cyclical. It’s politics and advocacy that enforce linearity.
“Previous work reported a tendency for global warming to result in a slightly more active jet stream in the atmosphere over the North Atlantic by 2100 but our results indicate we may actually see a somewhat weaker jet, at least in summer.”
The science is settled then.
The models are wrong with atmospheric pressure because the programmers think the jet steam will strengthen with warming. Also expected with global warming to develop increasingly positive NAO. (both wrong) These increasingly place the PV (polar vortex) over Greenland with low pressure. Large differences in temperature between polar air and sub-tropical air strengthens the jet stream. This tends to happen increasingly during a cooling planet and covers more of the planets surface because it is further away from the poles.
Weak solar activity causes indirectly pressure to rise over Greenland because during these periods the jet stream weakens and becomes more meridional.
The increase in pressure over Greenland occurred with weakening solar activity and had nothing to do with CO2 and/or Arctic sea ice because this would had happened well before. When these had for many years been increasing and decreasing accordingly. Though as usual with AGW anything happening even many years later is blamed on it. Nothing changed before, during or after it other than a decline in solar activity.
Modellers’ fixation with radiation ignores the dominant energy flows towards Space. That is by Convective/latent heat uplift. Because they are not practical Physicists or Engineers neither they, nor the trolls here, can understaand that energy as with water, always must find the easiest pathway.
The Ideal Gas Law nullifies any supposed special effects of Polyatomic molecules. This because of the relatively large space between gas molecules in the relevant operative PVT ranges.
Warmista, and even Willis, would rather play around with models. They never make data, they just cannot. But as with Willis Thunderstorm idea, the Universe does “Integrate Data Empirically” (h/t Einstein) for open eyes to see. Recent bloggers above have been rightly pushing empiricism and I thank them.
The importance of getting Greenland right for weather prediction was well known as far back as WW2. The Germans put remote weather stations in place at considerable effort.
Why wasn’t this a priority for the modelers?
Because you talk of weather over a few days and GCM’s handle climate, over decades.
A region of high pressure, an Anticyclone, especially one that is not semi-permanent does not affect climate.
It affects weather.
Weather is the movement of heat within the climate system.
It is not the overall balance of it between absorbed solar SW and outgoing terrestrial LWIR.
Climate deals with that.
The Greenland high is not semi-permanent, else there would be no snow build-up on its ice-cap such as we’ve seen trumpeted here this last summer.