The GFDL Global Atmospheric Chemistry‐Climate Model AM4.1: Model Description and Simulation Characteristics

We describe the baseline model configuration and simulation characteristics of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL)'s Atmosphere Model version 4.1 (AM4.1), which builds on developments at GFDL over 2013–2018 for coupled carbon‐chemistry‐climate simulation as part of the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. In contrast with GFDL's AM4.0 development effort, which focused on physical and aerosol interactions and which is used as the atmospheric component of CM4.0, AM4.1 focuses on comprehensiveness of Earth system interactions. Key features of this model include doubled horizontal resolution of the atmosphere (~200 to ~100 km) with revised dynamics and physics from GFDL's previous‐generation AM3 atmospheric chemistry‐climate model. AM4.1 features improved representation of atmospheric chemical composition, including aerosol and aerosol precursor emissions, key land‐atmosphere interactions, comprehensive land‐atmosphere‐ocean cycling of dust and iron, and interactive ocean‐atmosphere cycling of reactive nitrogen. AM4.1 provides vast improvements in fidelity over AM3, captures most of AM4.0's baseline simulations characteristics, and notably improves on AM4.0 in the representation of aerosols over the Southern Ocean, India, and China—even with its interactive chemistry representation—and in its manifestation of sudden stratospheric warmings in the coldest months. Distributions of reactive nitrogen and sulfur species, carbon monoxide, and ozone are all substantially improved over AM3. Fidelity concerns include degradation of upper atmosphere equatorial winds and of aerosols in some regions.

[1]  S. Malyshev,et al.  The GFDL Earth System Model Version 4.1 (GFDL‐ESM 4.1): Overall Coupled Model Description and Simulation Characteristics , 2020, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems.

[2]  L. Lee,et al.  Global sensitivity analysis of chemistry–climate model budgets of tropospheric ozone and OH: exploring model diversity , 2020 .

[3]  Shian-Jiann Lin,et al.  Structure and Performance of GFDL's CM4.0 Climate Model , 2019, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems.

[4]  S. Malyshev,et al.  Sensitivity of Ozone Dry Deposition to Ecosystem‐Atmosphere Interactions: A Critical Appraisal of Observations and Simulations , 2019, Global Biogeochemical Cycles.

[5]  E. Marais,et al.  An evaluation of global organic aerosol schemes using airborne observations , 2019, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[6]  D. Jacob,et al.  A new model mechanism for atmospheric oxidation of isoprene: global effects on oxidants, nitrogen oxides, organic products, and secondary organic aerosol , 2019, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[7]  H. Worden,et al.  Radiance-based retrieval bias mitigation for the MOPITT instrument: the version 8 product , 2019, Atmospheric Measurement Techniques.

[8]  S. Malyshev,et al.  The GFDL Earth System Model version 4 . 1 ( GFDL-ESM 4 . 1 ) : Model 1 description and simulation characteristics 2 3 , 2019 .

[9]  L. Oman,et al.  Trends in global tropospheric ozone inferred from a composite record of TOMS/OMI/MLS/OMPS satellite measurements and the MERRA-2 GMI simulation , 2018, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[10]  S. Malyshev,et al.  Representing sub-grid scale variations in nitrogen deposition associated with land use in a global Earth system model: implications for present and future nitrogen deposition fluxes over North America , 2018, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[11]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Exploring the relationship between surface PM2.5 and meteorology in Northern India , 2018, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[12]  J. R. Wilson,et al.  The GFDL Global Atmosphere and Land Model AM4.0/LM4.0: 1. Simulation Characteristics With Prescribed SSTs , 2018 .

[13]  J. R. Wilson,et al.  The GFDL Global Atmosphere and Land Model AM4.0/LM4.0: 2. Model Description, Sensitivity Studies, and Tuning Strategies , 2018 .

[14]  Jessica L. Neu,et al.  Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report:Assessment of global-scale model performance for global and regional ozone distributions, variability, and trends , 2018 .

[15]  Johannes W. Kaiser,et al.  Historic global biomass burning emissions for CMIP6 (BB4CMIP) based on merging satellite observations with proxies and fire models (1750-2015) , 2017 .

[16]  Paul Ginoux,et al.  Gas‐aerosol partitioning of ammonia in biomass burning plumes: Implications for the interpretation of spaceborne observations of ammonia and the radiative forcing of ammonium nitrate , 2017 .

[17]  Paul Charbonneau,et al.  Solar Forcing for CMIP6 (v3.1) , 2016 .

[18]  Meng Li,et al.  Historical (1750–2014) anthropogenic emissions of reactive gases and aerosols from the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS) , 2017 .

[19]  Nick Reid,et al.  Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: Database and Metrics Data of Global Surface Ozone Observations , 2017 .

[20]  A. Arneth,et al.  Historic global biomass burning emissions based on merging satellite observations with proxies and fire models (1750 - 2015) , 2017 .

[21]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Contrasting seasonal responses of sulfate aerosols to declining SO2 emissions in the Eastern U.S.: Implications for the efficacy of SO2 emission controls , 2017 .

[22]  L. Horowitz,et al.  US surface ozone trends and extremes from 1980 to 2014: quantifying the roles of rising Asian emissions, domestic controls, wildfires, and climate , 2016 .

[23]  Stefan Reimann,et al.  Historical greenhouse gas concentrations for climate modelling (CMIP6) , 2016 .

[24]  Climate‐vegetation interaction and amplification of Australian dust variability , 2016 .

[25]  D. Jacob,et al.  Why do Models Overestimate Surface Ozone in the Southeastern United States? , 2016, Atmospheric chemistry and physics.

[26]  Robert Pincus,et al.  The Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (RFMIP): Experimental Protocol for CMIP6 , 2016 .

[27]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Observational constraints on glyoxal production from isoprene oxidation and its contribution to organic aerosol over the Southeast United States , 2015, Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres : JGR.

[28]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Sensitivity of nitrate aerosols to ammonia emissions and to nitrate chemistry: implications for present and future nitrate optical depth , 2015 .

[29]  S. Doney,et al.  Global oceanic emission of ammonia: Constraints from seawater and atmospheric observations , 2015 .

[30]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Projecting policy‐relevant metrics for high summertime ozone pollution events over the eastern United States due to climate and emission changes during the 21st century , 2015 .

[31]  Joseph P. Pinto,et al.  Estimating North American background ozone in U.S. surface air with two independent global models: Variability, uncertainties, and recommendations , 2014 .

[32]  Kebin He,et al.  Heterogeneous chemistry: a mechanism missing in current models to explain secondary inorganic aerosol formation during the January 2013 haze episode in North China , 2014 .

[33]  Richard J. Blakeslee,et al.  Gridded lightning climatology from TRMM-LIS and OTD: Dataset description , 2014 .

[34]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Ozone and organic nitrates over the eastern United States: Sensitivity to isoprene chemistry , 2013 .

[35]  Daniel J. Jacob,et al.  Interannual variability in tropical tropospheric ozone and OH: The role of lightning , 2013 .

[36]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Impact of preindustrial to present‐day changes in short‐lived pollutant emissions on atmospheric composition and climate forcing , 2013 .

[37]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Stratospheric Ozone and Temperature Simulated from the Preindustrial Era to the Present Day , 2013 .

[38]  Jean-Christophe Golaz,et al.  The roles of aerosol direct and indirect effects in past and future climate change , 2013 .

[39]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Sensitivity of tropospheric oxidants to biomass burning emissions: implications for radiative forcing , 2013 .

[40]  Amy H. Butler,et al.  On the lack of stratospheric dynamical variability in low‐top versions of the CMIP5 models , 2013 .

[41]  J. Lamarque,et al.  Preindustrial to present-day changes in tropospheric hydroxyl radical and methane lifetime from the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) , 2012 .

[42]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Springtime high surface ozone events over the western United States: Quantifying the role of stratospheric intrusions , 2012 .

[43]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Transport of Asian ozone pollution into surface air over the western United States in spring , 2012 .

[44]  L. Emmons,et al.  The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions , 2012 .

[45]  S. Fan,et al.  Radical loss in the atmosphere from Cu-Fe redox coupling in aerosols , 2012 .

[46]  J. Lamarque,et al.  Pre-industrial to end 21st century projections of tropospheric ozone from the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) , 2012 .

[47]  S. Wanless,et al.  The global distribution of ammonia emissions from seabird colonies , 2012 .

[48]  Michael J. Prather,et al.  Reactive greenhouse gas scenarios: Systematic exploration of uncertainties and the role of atmospheric chemistry , 2012 .

[49]  A. J. Kettle,et al.  An updated climatology of surface dimethlysulfide concentrations and emission fluxes in the global ocean , 2011 .

[50]  L. Horowitz,et al.  Evaluation of factors controlling long‐range transport of black carbon to the Arctic , 2010 .

[51]  Becky Alexander,et al.  Global distribution of sea salt aerosols: new constraints from in situ and remote sensing observations , 2010 .

[52]  R. Derwent,et al.  Impacts of mechanistic changes on HO x formation and recycling in the oxidation of isoprene , 2010 .

[53]  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 .

[54]  Lorraine Remer,et al.  MISR Aerosol Product Attributes and Statistical Comparisons With MODIS , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[55]  J. Lamarque,et al.  Description and evaluation of the Model for Ozone and Related chemical Tracers, version 4 (MOZART-4) , 2009 .

[56]  G. Carmichael,et al.  Asian emissions in 2006 for the NASA INTEX-B mission , 2009 .

[57]  William J. Collins,et al.  Multimodel estimates of intercontinental source-receptor relationships for ozone pollution , 2008 .

[58]  A. Nenes,et al.  ISORROPIA II: a computationally efficient thermodynamic equilibrium model for K + –Ca 2+ –Mg 2+ –NH 4 + –Na + –SO 4 2− –NO 3 − –Cl − –H 2 O aerosols , 2007 .

[59]  E. Vermote,et al.  Second‐generation operational algorithm: Retrieval of aerosol properties over land from inversion of Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer spectral reflectance , 2007 .

[60]  L. Polvani,et al.  A New Look at Stratospheric Sudden Warmings. Part I: Climatology and Modeling Benchmarks , 2007 .

[61]  L. Polvani,et al.  A New Look at Stratospheric Sudden Warmings. Part II: Evaluation of Numerical Model Simulations , 2007 .

[62]  Tami C. Bond,et al.  Emissions of primary aerosol and precursor gases in the years 2000 and 1750 prescribed data-sets for AeroCom , 2006 .

[63]  P. Palmer,et al.  Estimates of global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature) , 2006 .

[64]  H. Eskes,et al.  Indicators of Antarctic ozone depletion , 2005 .

[65]  Martin Gallagher,et al.  Measurements and parameterizations of small aerosol deposition velocities to grassland, arable crops, and forest: Influence of surface roughness length on deposition , 2002 .

[66]  Teruyuki Nakajima,et al.  Tropospheric aerosol optical thickness from the GOCART model and comparisons with satellite and sun photometer measurements , 2002 .

[67]  J. Lamarque,et al.  A global simulation of tropospheric ozone and related tracers: Description and evaluation of MOZART, version 2 , 2001 .

[68]  Alexander Smirnov,et al.  Cloud-Screening and Quality Control Algorithms for the AERONET Database , 2000 .

[69]  Michael B. McElroy,et al.  Three-dimensional climatological distribution of tropospheric OH: Update and evaluation , 2000 .

[70]  T. Dunkerton,et al.  A spectral parameterization of mean-flow forcing due to breaking gravity waves , 1999 .

[71]  Colin Price,et al.  Vertical distributions of lightning NOx for use in regional and global chemical transport models , 1998 .

[72]  A. Smirnov,et al.  AERONET-a federated instrument network and data archive for aerosol Characterization , 1998 .

[73]  J. Penner,et al.  NOx from lightning 1. Global distribution based on lightning physics , 1997 .

[74]  J. Hansen,et al.  Climate-chemical interactions and effects of changing atmospheric trace gases , 1987 .

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

[76]  Richard M. Williams A model for the dry deposition of particles to natural water surfaces , 1982 .

[77]  Joseph M. Prospero,et al.  Aerosol concentration statistics for the Northern Tropical Atlantic , 1977 .