Scholarlink

<p>Historical Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) simulations underestimate spring Arctic warming due to insufficient representation of Ural blocking events. Observations reveal that strong winter warming over the Barents–Kara Sea (BKS) reduces the meridional potential vorticity gradient, thereby enhancing atmospheric blocking events and driving Arctic surface warming in spring. Many CMIP6 members, which exhibit lower sensitivity to climate forcing, involve the use of initial fields with warmer climate conditions (e.g. reduced sea ice cover). Consequently, these models simulate less sea ice melting and minimal winter BKS warming, leading to weaker Ural blocking events and underestimation of spring Arctic surface warming. While recent global surface temperature trends among CMIP6 models are relatively consistent, their future projections diverge due to their varying climate sensitivities, potentially underestimating global warming across different scenarios.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Underestimated Ural blocking events lead to weakened spring Arctic warming in CMIP6 simulations

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年2月26日

查看全文
  • Wenjun Wu,
  • Haijin Dai

摘要

Historical Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) simulations underestimate spring Arctic warming due to insufficient representation of Ural blocking events. Observations reveal that strong winter warming over the Barents–Kara Sea (BKS) reduces the meridional potential vorticity gradient, thereby enhancing atmospheric blocking events and driving Arctic surface warming in spring. Many CMIP6 members, which exhibit lower sensitivity to climate forcing, involve the use of initial fields with warmer climate conditions (e.g. reduced sea ice cover). Consequently, these models simulate less sea ice melting and minimal winter BKS warming, leading to weaker Ural blocking events and underestimation of spring Arctic surface warming. While recent global surface temperature trends among CMIP6 models are relatively consistent, their future projections diverge due to their varying climate sensitivities, potentially underestimating global warming across different scenarios.