12.08.2013 Views

final_program_abstracts[1]

final_program_abstracts[1]

final_program_abstracts[1]

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

11 IMSC Session Program<br />

Present-day interannual variability of surface climate in CMIP3<br />

models and its relation to the amplitude of future warming<br />

Thursday - Parallel Session 2<br />

Simon C. Scherrer<br />

Climate Services, Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology MeteoSwiss,<br />

Zürich, Switzerland<br />

Interannual variability (IAV) of 2m temperature (T), sea level pressure (SLP) and<br />

precipitation (P) in the CMIP3 20th century model simulations is compared with IAV<br />

in observational and reanalysis data sets. Further the relation between the<br />

representation of T IAV and the amplitude of future warming is investigated.<br />

In the Northern Hemisphere (NH) extratropics, T and SLP IAV are (in contrast to P)<br />

in general well represented although a few models perform much worse than others.<br />

General problem regions are i) sea ice boundary regions, where well known biases in<br />

the mean states exist and ii) the Pacific Ocean and Central Africa where SLP IAV is<br />

consistently underestimated. T and SLP IAV discrepancies are often found in similar<br />

regions and are large in well known bias problem regions in the tropics and subtropics<br />

and high mountain regions. “Bad” IAV representation also occurs in regions with<br />

small biases. T IAV is in general better reproduced on land than on sea and in the<br />

extratropics than in the tropics. Among the “good” IAV models there is no robust<br />

relation between the tropics (sea only) and the extratropics (land only).<br />

The relation between the model’s ability to correctly represent T IAV and projected<br />

temperature changes is slightly negative (more warming for better IAV<br />

representation) but except for the NH summer season not significant when the worst<br />

models in terms of IAV representation are omitted. With exception of NH summer,<br />

this suggests that no robust relations are found between the model’s ability to<br />

correctly represent T IAV and the projected temperature change.<br />

Abstracts 236

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!