The Max Planck Institute Grand Ensemble: Enabling the Exploration of Climate System Variability

The Max Planck Institute Grand Ensemble (MPI‐GE) is the largest ensemble of a single comprehensive climate model currently available, with 100 members for the historical simulations (1850–2005) and four forcing scenarios. It is currently the only large ensemble available that includes scenario representative concentration pathway (RCP) 2.6 and a 1% CO2 scenario. These advantages make MPI‐GE a powerful tool. We present an overview of MPI‐GE, its components, and detail the experiments completed. We demonstrate how to separate the forced response from internal variability in a large ensemble. This separation allows the quantification of both the forced signal under climate change and the internal variability to unprecedented precision. We then demonstrate multiple ways to evaluate MPI‐GE and put observations in the context of a large ensemble, including a novel approach for comparing model internal variability with estimated observed variability. Finally, we present four novel analyses, which can only be completed using a large ensemble. First, we address whether temperature and precipitation have a pathway dependence using the forcing scenarios. Second, the forced signal of the highly noisy atmospheric circulation is computed, and different drivers are identified to be important for the North Pacific and North Atlantic regions. Third, we use the ensemble dimension to investigate the time dependency of Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation variability changes under global warming. Last, sea level pressure is used as an example to demonstrate how MPI‐GE can be utilized to estimate the ensemble size needed for a given scientific problem and provide insights for future ensemble projects.

[1]  D. Schroeder Arctic sea ice , 2021, Climate Change.

[2]  D. Notz,et al.  Arctic sea-ice variability is primarily driven by atmospheric temperature fluctuations , 2019, Nature Geoscience.

[3]  Alexander J. Winkler,et al.  Developments in the MPI‐M Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI‐ESM1.2) and Its Response to Increasing CO2 , 2019, Journal of advances in modeling earth systems.

[4]  A. Jahn,et al.  Definition differences and internal variability affect the simulated Arctic sea ice melt season , 2019, The Cryosphere.

[5]  Jochem Marotzke,et al.  Quantifying the irreducible uncertainty in near‐term climate projections , 2018, WIREs Climate Change.

[6]  J. Marotzke,et al.  ENSO Change in Climate Projections: Forced Response or Internal Variability? , 2018, Geophysical Research Letters.

[7]  J. Kay,et al.  Influence of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation on the Northern Hemisphere Surface Temperature Response to Radiative Forcing , 2018, Journal of Climate.

[8]  Q. Fu,et al.  Larger Sensitivity of Precipitation Extremes to Aerosol Than Greenhouse Gas Forcing in CMIP5 Models , 2018, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.

[9]  C. Deser,et al.  Internal Variability and Regional Climate Trends in an Observational Large Ensemble , 2018, Journal of Climate.

[10]  L. Bengtsson,et al.  Can an ensemble climate simulation be used to separate climate change signals from internal unforced variability? , 2018, Climate Dynamics.

[11]  R. Seager,et al.  The Downward Influence of Uncertainty in the Northern Hemisphere Stratospheric Polar Vortex Response to Climate Change , 2018, Journal of Climate.

[12]  M. England,et al.  On the Choice of Ensemble Mean for Estimating the Forced Signal in the Presence of Internal Variability , 2018, Journal of Climate.

[13]  E. Manzini,et al.  Nonlinear Response of the Stratosphere and the North Atlantic‐European Climate to Global Warming , 2018 .

[14]  Robert R. Gillies,et al.  Quantitative attribution of climate effects on Hurricane Harvey’s extreme rainfall in Texas , 2018 .

[15]  B. Stevens,et al.  The influence of internal variability on Earth's energy balance framework and implications for estimating climate sensitivity , 2018 .

[16]  J. Marotzke,et al.  Internal variability in European summer temperatures at 1.5 °C and 2 °C of global warming , 2018, Environmental Research Letters.

[17]  Martin B. Stolpe,et al.  Multidecadal Variability in Global Surface Temperatures Related to the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation , 2018 .

[18]  D. Notz,et al.  Arctic Sea Ice in a 1.5°C Warmer World , 2018 .

[19]  H. Seo,et al.  North Atlantic winter eddy-driven jet and atmospheric blocking variability in the Community Earth System Model version 1 Large Ensemble simulations , 2018, Climate Dynamics.

[20]  A. Dai,et al.  Impacts of internal variability on temperature and precipitation trends in large ensemble simulations by two climate models , 2018, Climate Dynamics.

[21]  B. Stevens Reply to “Comments on ‘Rethinking the Lower Bound on Aerosol Radiative Forcing’” , 2015, Journal of Climate.

[22]  S. Buehler,et al.  How Robust Is the Weakening of the Pacific Walker Circulation in CMIP5 Idealized Transient Climate Simulations , 2018 .

[23]  T. Ilyina,et al.  Current and Future Decadal Trends in the Oceanic Carbon Uptake Are Dominated by Internal Variability , 2017 .

[24]  Unraveling Causes for the Changing Behavior of the Tropical Indian Ocean in the Past Few Decades , 2017 .

[25]  Young‐Oh Kwon,et al.  Estimation of the SST Response to Anthropogenic and External Forcing and Its Impact on the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation , 2017 .

[26]  D. Notz,et al.  Consistently Estimating Internal Climate Variability from Climate Model Simulations , 2017 .

[27]  C. Deser,et al.  Toward a New Estimate of “Time of Emergence” of Anthropogenic Warming: Insights from Dynamical Adjustment and a Large Initial-Condition Model Ensemble , 2017 .

[28]  Karen A. McKinnon,et al.  An “Observational Large Ensemble” to Compare Observed and Modeled Temperature Trend Uncertainty due to Internal Variability , 2017 .

[29]  T. Frölicher,et al.  Hiatus‐like decades in the absence of equatorial Pacific cooling and accelerated global ocean heat uptake , 2017 .

[30]  D. Notz Arctic sea ice seasonal-to-decadal variability and long-term change , 2017 .

[31]  J. Marotzke,et al.  Internal variability in simulated and observed tropical tropospheric temperature trends , 2017 .

[32]  J. Marotzke,et al.  The subtle origins of surface-warming hiatuses , 2017 .

[33]  W. Seviour Weakening and shift of the Arctic stratospheric polar vortex: Internal variability or forced response? , 2017 .

[34]  E. Fischer,et al.  Comparing Australian heat waves in the CMIP5 models through cluster analysis , 2017 .

[35]  Tamás Tél,et al.  The theory of parallel climate realizations as a new framework for teleconnection analysis , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[36]  F. Zwiers,et al.  Attribution of Extreme Events in Arctic Sea Ice Extent , 2017 .

[37]  C. Tebaldi,et al.  Benefits of mitigation for future heat extremes under RCP4.5 compared to RCP8.5 , 2018, Climatic Change.

[38]  J. Fasullo,et al.  Interannual Variability in Global Mean Sea Level Estimated from the CESM Large and Last Millennium Ensembles , 2016 .

[39]  Q. Fu,et al.  Sensitivity of precipitation extremes to radiative forcing of greenhouse gases and aerosols , 2016 .

[40]  C. Timmreck,et al.  Using a large ensemble of simulations to assess the Northern Hemisphere stratospheric dynamical response to tropical volcanic eruptions and its uncertainty , 2016 .

[41]  C. Deser,et al.  Forced and Internal Components of Winter Air Temperature Trends over North America during the past 50 Years: Mechanisms and Implications* , 2016 .

[42]  Shaoqing Zhang,et al.  Reduced interdecadal variability of Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation under global warming , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[43]  B. Stevens,et al.  Amplification of El Niño by cloud longwave coupling to atmospheric circulation , 2016 .

[44]  W. G. Strand,et al.  A new ensemble of GCM simulations to assess avoided impacts in a climate mitigation scenario , 2018, Climatic Change.

[45]  J. Gregory,et al.  Irreducible uncertainty in near-term climate projections , 2016, Climate Dynamics.

[46]  B. Sanderson,et al.  Does extreme precipitation intensity depend on the emissions scenario? , 2015 .

[47]  S. Solomon,et al.  Observational evidence of strengthening of the Brewer‐Dobson circulation since 1980 , 2015 .

[48]  M. England,et al.  Separating Internal Variability from the Externally Forced Climate Response , 2015 .

[49]  Dirk Notz,et al.  How well must climate models agree with observations? , 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[50]  K.,et al.  The Community Earth System Model (CESM) large ensemble project: a community resource for studying climate change in the presence of internal climate variability , 2015 .

[51]  V. Brovkin,et al.  Strong dependence of CO2 emissions from anthropogenic land cover change on initial land cover and soil carbon parametrization , 2015 .

[52]  C. Deser,et al.  Quantifying the Role of Internal Climate Variability in Future Climate Trends , 2015 .

[53]  M. England,et al.  Effects of volcanism on tropical variability , 2015 .

[54]  Adam A. Scaife,et al.  Stratospheric influence on tropospheric jet streams, storm tracks and surface weather , 2015 .

[55]  Tamás Bódai,et al.  Probabilistic Concepts in a Changing Climate: A Snapshot Attractor Picture , 2015 .

[56]  N. Diffenbaugh,et al.  Anthropogenic warming has increased drought risk in California , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[57]  Peter J. Webster,et al.  The albedo of Earth , 2015 .

[58]  J. Marotzke,et al.  Forcing, feedback and internal variability in global temperature trends , 2015, Nature.

[59]  Ed Hawkins,et al.  Influence of internal variability on Arctic sea-ice trends , 2015 .

[60]  Keith B. Rodgers,et al.  Emergence of multiple ocean ecosystem drivers in a large ensemble suite with an Earth system model , 2014 .

[61]  Stephan Lewandowsky,et al.  Well-estimated global surface warming in climate projections selected for ENSO phase , 2014 .

[62]  Shingo Watanabe,et al.  Northern winter climate change: Assessment of uncertainty in CMIP5 projections related to stratosphere‐troposphere coupling , 2014 .

[63]  G. Vecchi,et al.  ENSO Modulation: Is It Decadally Predictable? , 2014 .

[64]  Tobias Stacke,et al.  Impact of the soil hydrology scheme on simulated soil moisture memory , 2013, Climate Dynamics.

[65]  W. Collins,et al.  Evaluation of climate models , 2013 .

[66]  Jaclyn N. Brown,et al.  Climate Drift in the CMIP5 Models , 2013 .

[67]  Dongxiao Zhang,et al.  Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) in CMIP5 Models: RCP and Historical Simulations , 2013 .

[68]  Joseph Daron,et al.  On predicting climate under climate change , 2013 .

[69]  B. Stevens,et al.  Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI‐ESM simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 , 2013 .

[70]  V. Brovkin,et al.  Representation of natural and anthropogenic land cover change in MPI‐ESM , 2013 .

[71]  Hongmei Li,et al.  Global ocean biogeochemistry model HAMOCC: Model architecture and performance as component of the MPI‐Earth system model in different CMIP5 experimental realizations , 2013 .

[72]  B. Stevens,et al.  Atmospheric component of the MPI‐M Earth System Model: ECHAM6 , 2013 .

[73]  Elizabeth A. Barnes,et al.  Response of the Midlatitude Jets, and of Their Variability, to Increased Greenhouse Gases in the CMIP5 Models , 2013 .

[74]  G. Hegerl,et al.  Detection and attribution of climate change: from global to regional , 2013 .

[75]  C. Tebaldi,et al.  Long-term Climate Change: Projections, Commitments and Irreversibility , 2013 .

[76]  C. Timmreck,et al.  Impact of an extremely large magnitude volcanic eruption on the global climate and carbon cycle estimated from ensemble Earth System Model simulations , 2012 .

[77]  K. Taylor,et al.  Forcing, feedbacks and climate sensitivity in CMIP5 coupled atmosphere‐ocean climate models , 2012 .

[78]  P. Jones,et al.  Quantifying uncertainties in global and regional temperature change using an ensemble of observational estimates: The HadCRUT4 data set , 2012 .

[79]  Karl E. Taylor,et al.  An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design , 2012 .

[80]  J. Marotzke,et al.  Observations reveal external driver for Arctic sea‐ice retreat , 2012 .

[81]  C. Deser,et al.  Uncertainty in climate change projections: the role of internal variability , 2012, Climate Dynamics.

[82]  Ed Hawkins,et al.  Decadal Predictability of the Atlantic Ocean in a Coupled GCM: Forecast Skill and Optimal Perturbations Using Linear Inverse Modeling , 2009 .

[83]  G. Branstator,et al.  “Modes of Variability” and Climate Change , 2009 .

[84]  N. Gillett,et al.  The role of eddies in the southern ocean temperature response to the southern annular mode. , 2009 .

[85]  G. Burgers,et al.  El Niño and Greenhouse Warming: Results from Ensemble Simulations with the NCAR CCSM , 2005 .

[86]  R. Sutton,et al.  Atlantic Ocean Forcing of North American and European Summer Climate , 2005, Science.

[87]  Mojib Latif,et al.  The Max-Planck-Institute global ocean/sea ice model with orthogonal curvilinear coordinates , 2003 .

[88]  J. Coakley,et al.  Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) Validation Plan CERES Inversion to Instantaneous TOA Fluxes (Subsystem 4.5) , 2000 .

[89]  Bryan A. Baum,et al.  Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) , 1995 .