Comparison of Effective Radiative Forcing Calculations Using Multiple Methods, Drivers, and Models

T. Tang, D. Shindell, G. Faluvegi, G. Myhre, D. Olivié, A. Voulgarakis, M. Kasoar, T. Andrews, O. Boucher, P. M. Forster, Hodnebrog, T. Iversen, A. Kirkevåg, J. F. Lamarque, T. Richardson, B. H. Samset, C. W. Stjern, T. Takemura, C. Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We compare six methods of estimating effective radiative forcing (ERF) using a set of atmosphere-ocean general circulation models. This is the first multiforcing agent, multimodel evaluation of ERF values calculated using different methods. We demonstrate that previously reported apparent consistency between the ERF values derived from fixed sea surface temperature simulations and linear regression holds for most climate forcings, excluding black carbon (BC). When land adjustment is accounted for, however, the fixed sea surface temperature ERF values are generally 10–30% larger than ERFs derived using linear regression across all forcing agents, with a much larger (~70–100%) discrepancy for BC. Except for BC, this difference can be largely reduced by either using radiative kernel techniques or by exponential regression. Responses of clouds and their effects on shortwave radiation show the strongest variability in all experiments, limiting the application of regression-based ERF in small forcing simulations.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)4382-4394
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
Volume124
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Soot
radiative forcing
regression analysis
Linear regression
black carbon
sea surface temperature
carbon
surface temperature
methodology
shortwave radiation
climate forcing
Radiation
Temperature
General Circulation Models
climate
simulation
general circulation model
oceans
estimating
adjusting

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Geophysics
  • Forestry
  • Oceanography
  • Aquatic Science
  • Ecology
  • Water Science and Technology
  • Soil Science
  • Geochemistry and Petrology
  • Earth-Surface Processes
  • Atmospheric Science
  • Space and Planetary Science
  • Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Palaeontology

Cite this

Tang, T., Shindell, D., Faluvegi, G., Myhre, G., Olivié, D., Voulgarakis, A., ... Smith, C. (2019). Comparison of Effective Radiative Forcing Calculations Using Multiple Methods, Drivers, and Models. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 124(8), 4382-4394. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD030188

Comparison of Effective Radiative Forcing Calculations Using Multiple Methods, Drivers, and Models. / Tang, T.; Shindell, D.; Faluvegi, G.; Myhre, G.; Olivié, D.; Voulgarakis, A.; Kasoar, M.; Andrews, T.; Boucher, O.; Forster, P. M.; Hodnebrog; Iversen, T.; Kirkevåg, A.; Lamarque, J. F.; Richardson, T.; Samset, B. H.; Stjern, C. W.; Takemura, T.; Smith, C.

In: Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 124, No. 8, 01.01.2019, p. 4382-4394.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tang, T, Shindell, D, Faluvegi, G, Myhre, G, Olivié, D, Voulgarakis, A, Kasoar, M, Andrews, T, Boucher, O, Forster, PM, Hodnebrog, Iversen, T, Kirkevåg, A, Lamarque, JF, Richardson, T, Samset, BH, Stjern, CW, Takemura, T & Smith, C 2019, 'Comparison of Effective Radiative Forcing Calculations Using Multiple Methods, Drivers, and Models', Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, vol. 124, no. 8, pp. 4382-4394. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD030188
Tang, T. ; Shindell, D. ; Faluvegi, G. ; Myhre, G. ; Olivié, D. ; Voulgarakis, A. ; Kasoar, M. ; Andrews, T. ; Boucher, O. ; Forster, P. M. ; Hodnebrog ; Iversen, T. ; Kirkevåg, A. ; Lamarque, J. F. ; Richardson, T. ; Samset, B. H. ; Stjern, C. W. ; Takemura, T. ; Smith, C. / Comparison of Effective Radiative Forcing Calculations Using Multiple Methods, Drivers, and Models. In: Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. 2019 ; Vol. 124, No. 8. pp. 4382-4394.
@article{0bad2ea863484593844bbfdbda90d09c,
title = "Comparison of Effective Radiative Forcing Calculations Using Multiple Methods, Drivers, and Models",
abstract = "We compare six methods of estimating effective radiative forcing (ERF) using a set of atmosphere-ocean general circulation models. This is the first multiforcing agent, multimodel evaluation of ERF values calculated using different methods. We demonstrate that previously reported apparent consistency between the ERF values derived from fixed sea surface temperature simulations and linear regression holds for most climate forcings, excluding black carbon (BC). When land adjustment is accounted for, however, the fixed sea surface temperature ERF values are generally 10–30{\%} larger than ERFs derived using linear regression across all forcing agents, with a much larger (~70–100{\%}) discrepancy for BC. Except for BC, this difference can be largely reduced by either using radiative kernel techniques or by exponential regression. Responses of clouds and their effects on shortwave radiation show the strongest variability in all experiments, limiting the application of regression-based ERF in small forcing simulations.",
author = "T. Tang and D. Shindell and G. Faluvegi and G. Myhre and D. Olivi{\'e} and A. Voulgarakis and M. Kasoar and T. Andrews and O. Boucher and Forster, {P. M.} and Hodnebrog and T. Iversen and A. Kirkev{\aa}g and Lamarque, {J. F.} and T. Richardson and Samset, {B. H.} and Stjern, {C. W.} and T. Takemura and C. Smith",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1029/2018JD030188",
language = "English",
volume = "124",
pages = "4382--4394",
journal = "Journal of Geophysical Research",
issn = "0148-0227",
publisher = "American Geophysical Union",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of Effective Radiative Forcing Calculations Using Multiple Methods, Drivers, and Models

AU - Tang, T.

AU - Shindell, D.

AU - Faluvegi, G.

AU - Myhre, G.

AU - Olivié, D.

AU - Voulgarakis, A.

AU - Kasoar, M.

AU - Andrews, T.

AU - Boucher, O.

AU - Forster, P. M.

AU - Hodnebrog,

AU - Iversen, T.

AU - Kirkevåg, A.

AU - Lamarque, J. F.

AU - Richardson, T.

AU - Samset, B. H.

AU - Stjern, C. W.

AU - Takemura, T.

AU - Smith, C.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - We compare six methods of estimating effective radiative forcing (ERF) using a set of atmosphere-ocean general circulation models. This is the first multiforcing agent, multimodel evaluation of ERF values calculated using different methods. We demonstrate that previously reported apparent consistency between the ERF values derived from fixed sea surface temperature simulations and linear regression holds for most climate forcings, excluding black carbon (BC). When land adjustment is accounted for, however, the fixed sea surface temperature ERF values are generally 10–30% larger than ERFs derived using linear regression across all forcing agents, with a much larger (~70–100%) discrepancy for BC. Except for BC, this difference can be largely reduced by either using radiative kernel techniques or by exponential regression. Responses of clouds and their effects on shortwave radiation show the strongest variability in all experiments, limiting the application of regression-based ERF in small forcing simulations.

AB - We compare six methods of estimating effective radiative forcing (ERF) using a set of atmosphere-ocean general circulation models. This is the first multiforcing agent, multimodel evaluation of ERF values calculated using different methods. We demonstrate that previously reported apparent consistency between the ERF values derived from fixed sea surface temperature simulations and linear regression holds for most climate forcings, excluding black carbon (BC). When land adjustment is accounted for, however, the fixed sea surface temperature ERF values are generally 10–30% larger than ERFs derived using linear regression across all forcing agents, with a much larger (~70–100%) discrepancy for BC. Except for BC, this difference can be largely reduced by either using radiative kernel techniques or by exponential regression. Responses of clouds and their effects on shortwave radiation show the strongest variability in all experiments, limiting the application of regression-based ERF in small forcing simulations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064596208&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85064596208&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1029/2018JD030188

DO - 10.1029/2018JD030188

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85064596208

VL - 124

SP - 4382

EP - 4394

JO - Journal of Geophysical Research

JF - Journal of Geophysical Research

SN - 0148-0227

IS - 8

ER -