Evaluating clouds, aerosols, and their interactions in three global climate models using satellite simulators and observations

Accurately representing aerosol-cloud interactions in global climate models is challenging. As parameterizations evolve, it is important to evaluate their performance with appropriate use of observations. In this investigation we compare aerosols, clouds, and their interactions in three global climate models (Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory-Atmosphere Model 3 (AM3), National Center for Atmospheric Research-Community Atmosphere Model 5 (CAM5), and Goddard Institute for Space Studies-ModelE2) to Aqua Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) satellite observations. Modeled cloud properties are diagnosed using a MODIS simulator. Cloud droplet number concentrations (N) are computed identically from satellite-simulated and MODIS-observed values of liquid cloud optical depth and droplet effective radius. We find that aerosol optical depth (τa) simulated by models is similar to observations in many regions around the globe. For N, AM3 and CAM5 capture the observed spatial pattern of higher values in coastal marine stratocumulus versus remote ocean regions, though modeled values, in general, are higher than observed. Aerosol-cloud interactions were computed as the sensitivity of ln(N) to ln(τa) for coastal marine liquid clouds near South Africa (SAF) and Southeast Asia where τa varies in time. AM3 and CAM5 are more sensitive than observations, while the sensitivity for ModelE2 is statistically insignificant. This widely used sensitivity could be subject to misinterpretation due to the confounding influence of meteorology on both aerosols and clouds. A simple framework for assessing the sensitivity of ln(N) to ln(τa) at constant meteorology illustrates that observed sensitivity can change from positive to statistically insignificant when including the confounding influence of relative humidity. Satellite-simulated versus standard model values of N are compared; for CAM5 in SAF, standard model values are significantly lower than satellite-simulated values with a bias of 83 cm−3.

[1]  F. Bréon,et al.  Aerosol indirect effect on warm clouds over South-East Atlantic, from co-located MODIS and CALIPSO observations , 2012 .

[2]  S. Klein,et al.  The new GFDL global atmosphere and land model AM2-LM2: Evaluation with prescribed SST simulations , 2004 .

[3]  R. Wood,et al.  Subseasonal variability of low cloud radiative properties over the southeast Pacific Ocean , 2009 .

[4]  K. Caldeira,et al.  Dependence of climate forcing and response on the altitude of black carbon aerosols , 2012, Climate Dynamics.

[5]  Yoram J. Kaufman,et al.  Aerosol-cloud interaction inferred from MODIS satellite data and global aerosol models , 2006 .

[6]  Elizabeth C. Kent,et al.  Global analyses of sea surface temperature, sea ice, and night marine air temperature since the late nineteenth century , 2003 .

[7]  J. Lamarque,et al.  Aerosol indirect effects – general circulation model intercomparison and evaluation with satellite data , 2009 .

[8]  Johannes Quaas,et al.  Interpreting the cloud cover – aerosol optical depth relationship found in satellite data using a general circulation model , 2009 .

[9]  O. Edenhofer,et al.  Mitigation from a cross-sectoral perspective , 2007 .

[10]  D. E. Spiel,et al.  A Model of Marine Aerosol Generation Via Whitecaps and Wave Disruption , 1986 .

[11]  John M. Haynes,et al.  COSP: Satellite simulation software for model assessment , 2011 .

[12]  P. J. Jonker,et al.  Microphysical and Turbulent Structure of Nocturnal Stratocumulus as Observed during ASTEX , 1995 .

[13]  R. Ruedy,et al.  MATRIX (Multiconfiguration Aerosol TRacker of mIXing state): an aerosol microphysical module for global atmospheric models , 2008 .

[14]  S. Menon,et al.  The radiative influence of aerosol effects on liquid-phase cumulus and stratiform clouds based on sensitivity studies with two climate models , 2006 .

[15]  S. Ghan,et al.  Inclusion of Ice Microphysics in the NCAR Community Atmospheric Model Version 3 (CAM3) , 2007 .

[16]  François-Marie Bréon,et al.  Analysis of aerosol‐cloud interaction from multi‐sensor satellite observations , 2010 .

[17]  M. Khairoutdinov,et al.  A New Cloud Physics Parameterization in a Large-Eddy Simulation Model of Marine Stratocumulus , 2000 .

[18]  P. Stier,et al.  Regime‐based analysis of aerosol‐cloud interactions , 2012 .

[19]  Cloud Simulations in Response to Turbulence Parameterizations in the GISS Model E GCM , 2012 .

[20]  G. Feingold,et al.  The scale problem in quantifying aerosol indirect effects , 2011 .

[21]  Mikhail Ovchinnikov,et al.  Droplet nucleation: Physically‐based parameterizations and comparative evaluation , 2011 .

[22]  S. Ghan,et al.  A parameterization of aerosol activation: 2. Multiple aerosol types , 2000 .

[23]  U. Lohmann,et al.  Global indirect aerosol effects: a review , 2004 .

[24]  J. Hansen,et al.  Efficacy of climate forcings , 2005 .

[25]  L. Schüller,et al.  Radiative Properties of Boundary Layer Clouds: Droplet Effective Radius versus Number Concentration , 2000 .

[26]  L. Sloan,et al.  A comparative study of the response of modeled non-drizzling stratocumulus to meteorological and aerosol perturbations , 2012 .

[27]  Ramaswamy,et al.  The dynamical core, physical parameterizations, and basic simulation characteristics of the atmospheric component AM3 of the GFDL global coupled model CM3 , 2011 .

[28]  Ralf Bennartz,et al.  Global assessment of marine boundary layer cloud droplet number concentration from satellite , 2007 .

[29]  J. Seinfeld,et al.  Parameterization of cloud droplet formation in global climate models , 2003 .

[30]  Philip Stier,et al.  A critical look at spatial scale choices in satellite-based aerosol indirect effect studies , 2010 .

[31]  C. Bretherton,et al.  The University of Washington Shallow Convection and Moist Turbulence Schemes and Their Impact on Climate Simulations with the Community Atmosphere Model , 2009 .

[32]  Jing Zhao,et al.  Satellite observed aerosol-induced variability in warm cloud properties under different meteorological conditions over eastern China , 2014 .

[33]  Dana E. Veron,et al.  First measurements of the Twomey indirect effect using ground‐based remote sensors , 2003 .

[34]  Lorraine A. Remer,et al.  The invigoration of deep convective clouds over the Atlantic: aerosol effect, meteorology or retrieval artifact? , 2010 .

[35]  Xiaohong Liu,et al.  Aerosol first indirect effects on non‐precipitating low‐level liquid cloud properties as simulated by CAM5 at ARM sites , 2012 .

[36]  W. Gates.  AMIP: The Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project. , 1992 .

[37]  Andrew Gettelman,et al.  Evaluation of cloud and water vapor simulations in CMIP5 climate models using NASA “A-Train” satellite observations , 2012 .

[38]  Robert Pincus,et al.  Exposing Global Cloud Biases in the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) Using Satellite Observations and Their Corresponding Instrument Simulators , 2012 .

[39]  M. Andreae.  Correlation between cloud condensation nuclei concentration and aerosol optical thickness in remote and polluted regions , 2008 .

[40]  S. Ghan,et al.  A New Two-Moment Bulk Stratiform Cloud Microphysics Scheme in the Community Atmosphere Model, Version 3 (CAM3). Part II: Single-Column and Global Results , 2008 .

[41]  S. Klein,et al.  Global simulations of ice nucleation and ice supersaturation with an improved cloud scheme in the Community Atmosphere Model , 2010 .

[42]  U. Lohmann,et al.  Constraining the total aerosol indirect effect in the LMDZ and ECHAM4 GCMs using MODIS satellite data , 2005 .

[43]  Continental liquid water cloud variability and its parameterization using Atmospheric Radiation Measurement data , 2005 .

[44]  V. Ramaswamy,et al.  A New Parameterization of Cloud Droplet Activation Applicable to General Circulation Models , 2006 .

[45]  Prashant Kumar,et al.  Parameterization of cloud droplet formation for global and regional models: including adsorption activation from insoluble CCN , 2009 .

[46]  Andrew K. Heidinger,et al.  Pollution from China increases cloud droplet number, suppresses rain over the East China Sea , 2011 .

[47]  Richard Neale,et al.  Toward a Minimal Representation of Aerosols in Climate Models: Description and Evaluation in the Community Atmosphere Model CAM5 , 2012 .

[48]  Daehyun Kim,et al.  The Tropical Subseasonal Variability Simulated in the NASA GISS General Circulation Model , 2012 .

[49]  M. Tiedtke,et al.  Representation of Clouds in Large-Scale Models , 1993 .

[50]  V. Canuto,et al.  Present-Day Atmospheric Simulations Using GISS ModelE: Comparison to In Situ, Satellite, and Reanalysis Data , 2006 .

[51]  W. Paul Menzel,et al.  The MODIS cloud products: algorithms and examples from Terra , 2003, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[52]  S. Menon,et al.  CURRENT UNCERTAINTIES IN ASSESSING AEROSOL EFFECTS ON CLIMATE , 2004 .

[53]  J. Brenguier,et al.  Microphysical properties of stratocumulus clouds , 2000 .

[54]  E. Vermote,et al.  The MODIS Aerosol Algorithm, Products, and Validation , 2005 .

[55]  S. Massie,et al.  Clean and polluted clouds: Relationships among pollution, ice clouds, and precipitation in South America , 2008 .

[56]  L. Ruby Leung,et al.  Prediction of cloud droplet number in a general , 1997 .

[57]  S. Bony,et al.  Comparing clouds and their seasonal variations in 10 atmospheric general circulation models with satellite measurements , 2005 .

[58]  Anthony D. Del Genio,et al.  A Prognostic Cloud Water Parameterization for Global Climate Models , 1996 .

[59]  R. Hemler,et al.  Multivariate probability density functions with dynamics in the GFDL Atmospheric General Circulation Model: Global tests , 2014 .

[60]  S. Massie,et al.  Influence of convection and aerosol pollution on ice cloud particle effective radius , 2010 .

[61]  A. Heidinger,et al.  Regional assessment of microphysical properties of marine boundary layer cloud using the PATMOS‐x dataset , 2010 .

[62]  R. Reynolds,et al.  The NCEP/NCAR 40-Year Reanalysis Project , 1996, Renewable Energy.

[63]  Cynthia H. Twohy,et al.  Effect of changes in relative humidity on aerosol scattering near clouds , 2008 .

[64]  F. Giorgi,et al.  The rainout parameterization in a photochemical model , 1985 .

[65]  Steven Platnick,et al.  An assessment of differences between cloud effective particle radius retrievals for marine water clouds from three MODIS spectral bands , 2011 .

[66]  J. Penner,et al.  Satellite methods underestimate indirect climate forcing by aerosols , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[67]  Q. Min,et al.  An assessment of aerosol-cloud interactions in marine stratus clouds based on surface remote sensing , 2009 .

[68]  A. Nenes,et al.  Global distribution of cloud droplet number concentration, autoconversion rate, and aerosol indirect effect under diabatic droplet activation , 2011 .

[69]  H. Douville,et al.  The CNRM-CM5.1 global climate model: description and basic evaluation , 2013, Climate Dynamics.

[70]  Takashi Nakajima,et al.  Droplet Growth in Warm Water Clouds Observed by the A-Train. Part I: Sensitivity Analysis of the MODIS-Derived Cloud Droplet Sizes , 2010 .

[71]  Jean-Christophe Golaz,et al.  Sensitivity of the Aerosol Indirect Effect to Subgrid Variability in the Cloud Parameterization of the GFDL Atmosphere General Circulation Model AM3 , 2011 .

[72]  Leon D. Rotstayn,et al.  A physically based scheme for the treatment of stratiform clouds and precipitation in large‐scale models. I: Description and evaluation of the microphysical processes , 1997 .

[73]  William M. Putman,et al.  Configuration and assessment of the GISS ModelE2 contributions to the CMIP5 archive , 2014 .

[74]  A. Nenes,et al.  Parameterization of cloud droplet formation in large‐scale models: Including effects of entrainment , 2007 .

[75]  Ilan Koren,et al.  The effect of smoke, dust, and pollution aerosol on shallow cloud development over the Atlantic Ocean. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[76]  Q. Min,et al.  The role of adiabaticity in the aerosol first indirect effect , 2007 .

[77]  M. Chin,et al.  Sources and distributions of dust aerosols simulated with the GOCART model , 2001 .

[78]  Melanie A. Wetzel,et al.  Evaluation of the aerosol indirect effect in marine stratocumulus clouds : droplet number, size, liquid water path, and radiative impact , 2005 .

[79]  Comparison of MODIS cloud microphysical properties with in-situ measurements over the Southeast Pacific , 2012 .

[80]  Yoram J. Kaufman,et al.  Analysis of smoke impact on clouds in Brazilian biomass burning regions: An extension of Twomey's approach , 2001 .

[81]  Sonoyo Mukai,et al.  A study of the direct and indirect effects of aerosols using global satellite data sets of aerosol and cloud parameters , 2003 .

[82]  S. Ghan,et al.  Parallel simulations of aerosol influence on clouds using cloud‐resolving and single‐column models , 2005 .

[83]  O. Boucher,et al.  Constraining the first aerosol indirect radiative forcing in the LMDZ GCM using POLDER and MODIS satellite data , 2005 .

[84]  D. Koch,et al.  Analyzing signatures of aerosol‐cloud interactions from satellite retrievals and the GISS GCM to constrain the aerosol indirect effect , 2008 .

[85]  Marie Doutriaux-Boucher,et al.  A comparison of cloud droplet radii measured from space , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[86]  C. Bretherton,et al.  Open cellular structure in marine stratocumulus sheets , 2008 .

[87]  V. Ramaswamy,et al.  Distribution, transport, and deposition of mineral dust in the Southern Ocean and Antarctica: Contribution of major sources , 2008 .

[88]  S. M. Marlais,et al.  An Overview of the Results of the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP I) , 1999 .

[89]  S. Twomey.  The Influence of Pollution on the Shortwave Albedo of Clouds , 1977 .

[90]  Steven Platnick,et al.  Impact of three‐dimensional radiative effects on satellite retrievals of cloud droplet sizes , 2006 .

[91]  Yonghua Chen,et al.  CORRIGENDUM of the MJO Transition from Shallow to Deep Convection in Cloudsat-Calipso Data and GISS GCM Simulations , 2012 .

[92]  V. Ramanathan,et al.  Aerosols, Climate, and the Hydrological Cycle , 2001, Science.

[93]  Robert F. Cahalan,et al.  A simple model for the cloud adjacency effect and the apparent bluing of aerosols near clouds , 2008 .

[94]  Paul Ginoux,et al.  Modeling the interactions between aerosols and liquid water clouds with a self-consistent cloud scheme in a general circulation model , 2007 .

[95]  Andrew Gettelman,et al.  A new two-moment bulk stratiform cloud microphysics scheme in the Community Atmosphere Model, version 3 (CAM3). Part I: Description and numerical tests , 2008 .

[96]  Graham Feingold,et al.  Explanation of discrepancies among satellite observations of the aerosol indirect effects , 2003 .

[97]  Robert Pincus,et al.  Reconciling Simulated and Observed Views of Clouds: MODIS, ISCCP, and the Limits of Instrument Simulators in Climate Models , 2011 .

[98]  J. Katzfey,et al.  A Scheme for Calculation of the Liquid Fraction in Mixed-Phase Stratiform Clouds in Large-Scale Models , 2000 .

[99]  Athanasios Nenes,et al.  Continued development of a cloud droplet formation parameterization for global climate models , 2005 .

[100]  A. Ekman,et al.  Impact of meteorological factors on the correlation between aerosol optical depth and cloud fraction , 2010 .

[101]  Daniel Orlikowski,et al.  Black carbon aerosols and the third polar ice cap , 2009 .

[102]  David S. Lee,et al.  Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application , 2010 .