The model evaluation chapter of the IPCC Second Assessment Report (Gates et al., 1996) found that “large-scale features of the current climate are well simulated on average by current coupled models.” However, two major points of concern were noted. Firstly, the SAR found that simulation of clouds and related processes “remains a major source of uncertainty in atmospheric models”. As discussed in Chapter 7, these processes continue to account for most of the uncertainty in predicting human-induced climate change. Secondly, the SAR noted an unsatisfactory situation involving flux adjustments (Section 8.4.2): they “are relatively large in the models that use them, but their absence affects the realism of the control climate and the associated feedback processes”. Improvements in coupled climate models since the SAR have addressed both points of concern. For the atmospheric (as well as the oceanic) component, these improvements have included higher horizontal resolution (which means less numerical diffusion and better representation of topography), and advances in parametrizations. In addition, the advent of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Program (CMIP; see Meehl et al., 2000a) since the SAR has provided an additional database for evaluating AOGCMs. Some basic details of models evaluated in this chapter and used elsewhere in this report are presented in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1: Model control runs: a consolidated list of coupled AOGCMs that are assessed in Chapter 8 and used in other Chapters. The naming convention for the models is as agreed by all modelling groups involved. Under the heading CMIP: 1,2 indicate that the model control run is included in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Phase 1 and 2 (CMIP1 and 2) databases, respectively. | ||||||||||||
MODEL NAME | CENTRE | REFERENCE | CMIP | Ch 9 | Ch 11 | Ch 12 | ATMOSPHERIC RESOLUTION | OCEAN RESOLUTION | LAND SURFACE | SEA ICE | FLUX ADJUST | |
1 | ARPEGE/OPA1 | CERFACS | Guilyardi and Madec, 1997 | 1 | --- | T21 (5.6 x 5.6) L30 | 2.0 x 2.0 L31* | C | (d) | - | ||
2 | ARPEGE/OPA2 | CERFACS | Barthelet et al., 1998a,b | 2 | C-- | T31 (3.9 x 3.9) L19 | 2.0 x 2.0 L31* | C | T | - | ||
3 | BMRCa | BMRC | Power et al., 1993 | 1 | C-- | R21 (3.2 x 5.6) L9 | 3.2 x 5.6 L12 | M,B | T | - | ||
4 | BMRCb | BMRC | Power et al., 1998 | 2 | --- | R21 (3.2 x 5.6) L17 | 3.2 x 5.6 L12* | M,B | T | H,W | ||
5 | CCSR/NIES | CCSR/NIES | Emori et al., 1999 | 1,2 | C-D | T21 (5.6 x 5.6) L20 | 2.8 x 2.8 L17 | M,BB | T | H,W | ||
6 | CGCM1 | CCCma | Boer et al., 2000; Flato et al., 2000 |
1,2 | C-D | * | * | T32 (3.8 x 3.8) L10 | 1.8 x 1.8 L29 | M,BB | T | H,W |
7 | CGCM2 | CCCma | Flato and Boer, 2001 | - | -S- | * | * | T32 (3.8 x 3.8) L10 | 1.8 x 1.8 L29 | M,BB | T,R | H,W |
8 | COLA1 | COLA |
Schneider et al., 1997; |
1 | --- | R15 (4.5 x 7.5) L9 | 1.5 x 1.5 L20* | C | T | - | ||
9 | COLA2 | COLA | Dewitt and Schneider, 1999 | 1 | --- | T30 (4 x 4) L18 | 3.0 x 3.0 L20* | C | T | - | ||
10 | CSIRO Mk2 | CSIRO | Gordon and O’Farrell, 1997 | 1,2 | C-D | R21 (3.2 x 5.6) L9 | 3.2 x 5.6 L21 | C | T,R | H,W,M | ||
11 | CSM 1.0 | NCAR | Boville and Gent, 1998 | 1,2 | C-- | T42 (2.8 x 2.8) L18 | 2.0 x 2.4 L45* | C | T,R | - | ||
12 | CSM 1.3 | NCAR | Boville et al., 2001 | - | -SD | T42 (2.8 x 2.8) L18 | 2.0 x 2.4 L45* | C | T,R | - | ||
13 | ECHAM1/LSG | DKRZ | Cubasch et al., 1992; von Storch, 1994; von Storch et al., 1997 |
1 | --- | * | T21 (5.6 x 5.6) L19 | 4.0 x 4.0 L11 | C | T | H,W,M | |
14 | ECHAM3/LSG | DKRZ | Cubasch et al 1997; Voss et al., 1998 |
1,2 | C-D | * | T21 (5.6 x 5.6) L19 | 4.0 x 4.0 L11 | C | T | H,W,M | |
15 | ECHAM4/OPYC3 | DKRZ | Roeckner et al., 1996 | 1 | C-D | * | * | T42 (2.8 x 2.8) L19 | 2.8 x 2.8 L11* | C | T,R | H,W(*) |
16 | GFDL_R15_a | GFDL | Manabe et al., 1991; Manabe and Stouffer1996 |
1,2 | C-D | * | R15 (4.5 x 7.5) L9 | 4.5 x 3.7 L12 | B | T,F | H,W | |
17 | GFDL_R15_b | GFDL | Dixon and Lanzante, 1999 | - | C-- | * | R15 (4.5 x 7.5) L9 | 4.5 x 3.7 L12 | B | T,F | H,W | |
18 | GFDL_R30_c | GFDL | Knutson et al., 1999 | - | CS- | * | * | R30 (2.25 x 3.75) L14 | 1.875 x 2.25 L18 | B | T,F | H,W |
19 | GISS1 | GISS | Miller and Jiang, 1996 | 1 | --- | 4.0 x 5.0 L9 | 4.0 x 5.0 L16 | C | T | - | ||
20 | GISS2 | GISS | Russell et al., 1995 | 1,2 | C-- | 4.0 x 5.0 L9 | 4.0 x 5.0 L13 | C | T | - | ||
21 | GOALS | IAP/LASG | Wu et al., 1997; Zhang et al., 2000 |
1,2 | C-- | R15 (4.5 x 7.5) L9 | 4.0 x 5.0 L20 | C | T | H,W,M | ||
22 | HadCM2 | UKMO | Johns 1996; Johns et al., 1997 |
1,2 | C-D | * | 2.5 x 3.75 L19 | 2.5 x 3.75 L20 | C | T,F | H,W | |
23 | HadCM3 | UKMO | Gordon et al., 2000 | 2 | CSD | * | 2.5 x 3.75 L19 | 1.25 x 1.25 L20 | C | T,F | - | |
24 | IPSL-CM1 | IPSL/LMD | Braconnot et al., 2000 | 1 | --- | 5.6 x 3.8 L15 | 2.0 x 2.0 L31* | C | (d) | - | ||
25 | IPSL-CM2 | IPSL/LMD | Laurent et al., 1998; | 2 | C-- | 5.6 x 3.8 L15 | 2.0 x 2.0 L31* | C | T | - | ||
26 | MRI1a | MRI | Tokioka et al., 1996 | 1,(2)a | C-- | 4.0 x 5.0 L15 | 2.0 x 2.5 L21(23)a* | M,B | T,F | H,W | ||
27 | MRI2 | MRI | Yukimoto et al., 2000 | - | CS- | * | T42(2.8 x 2.8) L30 | 2.0 x 2.5 L23* | C | T,F | H,W,M | |
28 | NCAR1 | NCAR | Meehl and Washington, 1995; Washington and Meehl, 1996 |
1,2 | --- | R15 (4.5 x 7.5) L9 | 1.0 x 1.0 L20 | B | T,R | - | ||
29 | NRL | NRL | Hogan and Li, 1997; Li and Hogan, 1999 |
1,2 | --- | T47 (2.5 x 2.5) L18 | 1.0 x 2.0 L25* | BB | T(p) | H,W(*) | ||
30 | DOE PCM | NCAR | Washington et al., 2000 | 2 | CSD | T42 (2.8 x 2.8) L18 | 0.67 x 0.67 L32 | C | T,R | - | ||
31 | CCSR/NIES2 | CCSR/NIES | Nozawa et al., 2000 | - | CS- | T21 (5.6 x 5.6) L20 | 2.8 x 3.8 L17 | M,BB | T | H,W | ||
I1 | BERN2D | PIUB | Stocker et al., 1992; Schmittner & Stocker, 1999 |
- | --- | * | 10* x ZA L1 | 10* x ZA L15 | - | T | - | |
I2 | UVIC | UVIC | Fanning and Weaver, 1996; Weaver et al., 1998 |
- | --- | * | 1.8 x 3.6 L1 | 1.8 x 3.6 L19 | - | T,R | - | |
I3 | CLIMBER | PIK | Petoukhov et al., 2000 | - | --- | * | 10 x 51 L2 | 10 x ZA L11 | C | T,F | - | |
a Model MRI1 exists in two versions. At the time of writing, more complete assessment data was available for the earlier version, whose control run is in the CMIP1 database. This model is used in Chapter 8. The model used in Chapter 9 has two extra ocean levels and a modified ocean mixing scheme. Its control run is in the CMIP2 database. The equilibrium climate sensitivities and Transient Climate Responses (Chapter 9, Table 9.1) of the two models are the same. CMIP: 1,2 indicate that the model control run is included in the
CMIP1 and CMIP2 databases, respectively. |
Other reports in this collection |