Search

The single-column model (SCM) functionality of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1 (E3SMv1) is described in this paper. The E3SM SCM was adopted from the SCM used in the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) but has evolved significantly since then. We describe changes made to the aerosol specification in the SCM, idealizations, and developments made so that the SCM uses the same dynamical core as the full general circulation model (GCM) component. Based on these changes, we describe and demonstrate the seamless capability to “replay” a GCM column using the SCM. We give an overview of the E3SM case library and briefly describe which cases may serve as useful proxies for replicating and investigate some long-standing biases in the full GCM runs while demonstrating that the E3SM SCM is an efficient tool for both model development and evaluation.

This paper presents a process-oriented evaluation of precipitating stratocumulus and its transition to cumulus in version 1 of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SMv1) using comprehensive case-study observations from a field campaign of the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement program (ARM). The E3SMv1 single-column model (SCM) of the marine boundary layer and its low clouds and precipitation are compared to observations including subcloud drizzle retrievals from a combination of Doppler radar and lidar backscatter measurements. The SCM is also compared to a large-eddy simulation (LES) of the same case. The combination of advanced remote sensing observations and LES is a powerful framework to evaluate the physical parameterizations of large-scale models. Given the observed large-scale environment, the E3SMv1 SCM realistically represents the evolution of clouds and boundary layer structure during the stratocumulus-to-cumulus transition. The model well simulates the liquid water path and its diurnal cycle in the stratocumulus period as well as the two-layer vertical thermodynamic structure and lower cloud fraction in the transition period. E3SMv1’s success in simulating the cloud in the stratocumulus period permitted examination of its precipitation processes. Here problems were identified with E3SMv1 producing an unrealistically small subcloud precipitation fraction, an unrealistic double peak in the vertical profiles of precipitation mass, and drizzle that evaporates too close to the surface. Further model diagnostics determined that these unrealistic characteristics resulted from an overly long microphysics time step and an unrealistic parameterization of the precipitation fraction. These results imply that careful consideration of these issues is needed in order to better simulate precipitation processes in marine stratocumulus.

This paper describes the first implementation of the Δx = 3.25 km version of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) global atmosphere model and its behavior in a 40‐day prescribed‐sea‐surface‐temperature simulation (January 20 through February 28, 2020). This simulation was performed as part of the DYnamics of the Atmospheric general circulation Modeled On Non‐hydrostatic Domains (DYAMOND) Phase 2 model intercomparison. Effective resolution is found to be ∼6× the horizontal dynamics grid resolution despite using a coarser grid for physical parameterizations. Despite this new model being in an immature and untuned state, moving to 3.25 km grid spacing solves several long‐standing problems with the E3SM model. In particular, Amazon precipitation is much more realistic, the frequency of light and heavy precipitation is improved, agreement between the simulated and observed diurnal cycle of tropical precipitation is excellent, and the vertical structure of tropical convection and coastal stratocumulus look good. In addition, the new model is able to capture the frequency and structure of important weather events (e.g., tropical cyclones, extratropical cyclones including atmospheric rivers, and cold air outbreaks). Interestingly, this model does not get rid of the erroneous southern branch of the intertropical convergence zone nor the tendency for strongest convection to occur over the Maritime Continent rather than the West Pacific, both of which are classic climate model biases. Several other problems with the simulation are identified, underscoring the fact that this model is a work in progress.

Climate simulations with more accurate process-level representation at finer resolutions ( km) are a pressing need in order to provide more detailed actionable information to policy makers regarding extreme events in a changing climate. Computational limitation is a major obstacle for building and running high-resolution (HR, here 0.25∘ average grid spacing at the Equator) models (HRMs). A more affordable path to HRMs is to use a global regionally refined model (RRM), which only simulates a portion of the globe at HR while the remaining is at low resolution (LR, 1∘). In this study, we compare the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) atmosphere model version 1 (EAMv1) RRM with the HR mesh over the contiguous United States (CONUS) to its corresponding globally uniform LR and HR configurations as well as to observations and reanalysis data. The RRM has a significantly reduced computational cost (roughly proportional to the HR mesh size) relative to the globally uniform HRM. Over the CONUS, we evaluate the simulation of important dynamical and physical quantities as well as various precipitation measures. Differences between the RRM and HRM over the HR region are predominantly small, demonstrating that the RRM reproduces the precipitation metrics of the HRM over the CONUS. Further analysis based on RRM simulations with the LR vs. HR model parameters reveals that RRM performance is greatly influenced by the different parameter choices used in the LR and HR EAMv1. This is a result of the poor scale-aware behavior of physical parameterizations, especially for variables influencing sub-grid-scale physical processes. RRMs can serve as a useful framework to test physics schemes across a range of scales, leading to improved consistency in future E3SM versions. Applying nudging-to-observations techniques within the RRM framework also demonstrates significant advantages over a free-running configuration for use as a test bed and as such represents an efficient and more robust physics test bed capability. Our results provide additional confirmatory evidence that the RRM is an efficient and effective test bed for HRM development.

The Single Column Atmosphere Model (SCAM) is a single column model version of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM). Here we describe the functionality and features of SCAM6, available as part of CAM6 in the Community Earth System Model, version 2 (CESM2). SCAM6 features a wide selection of standard cases, as well as the ability to easily configure a case specified by the user based on a particular point in a CAM 3‐D simulation. This work illustrates how SCAM6 reproduces CAM6 results for physical parameterizations, mostly of moisture and clouds. We demonstrate how SCAM6 can be used for model development through different physics selections, as well as with parameter sweep experiments to highlight the sensitivity of cloud properties to the specification of the vapor deposition process in the cloud microphysics. Furthermore, we use SCAM6 to illustrate the sensitivity of CAM6 cloud radiative properties and precipitation to variable drop number (cloud microphysics properties). Finally, we illustrate how SCAM6 can be used to explore critical emergent processes such as cloud feedbacks and show that CAM6 cloud responses to surface warming in stratus and stratocumulus regimes are similar to those in CAM5. CAM6 has a larger response in the shallow cumulus regime than CAM5. CAM6 cloud feedbacks in the shallow cumulus regime are sensitive to turbulence parameters. SCAM6 is thus a valuable tool for model development, evaluation, and scientific analy sis and an important part of the model hierarchy in Community Earth System Model, version 2.

In this study, we find significant sensitivity to the choice of time step for the Energy Exascale Earth System Model's atmospheric component, leading to large decreases in the magnitude of cloud forcing when the time step is reduced to 10 s. Reducing the time step size for the microphysics increases precipitation, leading to a drying of the atmosphere and an increase in surface evaporation. This effect is amplified when the microphysics is substepped together with other cloud physics processes. Coupling the model's dynamics and physics more frequently reduces cloud fraction at lower altitudes, while producing more cloud liquid at higher altitudes. Reducing the deep convection time step also reduces low cloud mass and cloud fraction. Together, these results suggest that cloud physics in a global circulation model can depend strongly on time step and, in particular, on the frequency with which cloud‐related processes are coupled with each other and with the model dynamics.

This study provides comprehensive insight into the notable differences in clouds and precipitation simulated by the Energy Exascale Earth System Model Atmosphere Model version 0 and version 1 (EAMv1). Several sensitivity experiments are conducted to isolate the impact of changes in model physics, resolution, and parameter choices on these differences. The overall improvement in EAMv1 clouds and precipitation is primarily attributed to the introduction of a simplified third‐order turbulence parameterization Cloud Layers Unified By Binormals (along with the companion changes) for a unified treatment of boundary layer turbulence, shallow convection, and cloud macrophysics, though it also leads to a reduction in subtropical coastal stratocumulus clouds. This lack of stratocumulus clouds is considerably improved by increasing vertical resolution from 30 to 72 layers, but the gain is unfortunately subsequently offset by other retuning to reach the top‐of‐atmosphere energy balance. Increasing vertical resolution also results in a considerable underestimation of high clouds over the tropical warm pool, primarily due to the selection for numerical stability of a higher air parcel launch level in the deep convection scheme. Increasing horizontal resolution from 1° to 0.25° without retuning leads to considerable degradation in cloud and precipitation fields, with much weaker tropical and subtropical short‐ and longwave cloud radiative forcing and much stronger precipitation in the intertropical convergence zone, indicating poor scale awareness of the cloud parameterizations. To avoid this degradation, significantly different parameter settings for the low‐resolution (1°) and high‐resolution (0.25°) were required to achieve optimal performance in EAMv1.

The conservation of total water is an important numerical feature for global Earth system models. Even small conservation problems in the water budget can lead to systematic errors in century-long simulations. This study quantifies and reduces various sources of water conservation error in the atmosphere component of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model. Several sources of water conservation error have been identified during the development of the version 1 (V1) model. The largest errors result from the numerical coupling between the resolved dynamics and the parameterized sub-grid physics. A hybrid coupling using different methods for fluid dynamics and tracer transport provides a reduction of water conservation error by a factor of 50 at 1∘ horizontal resolution as well as consistent improvements at other resolutions. The second largest error source is the use of an overly simplified relationship between the surface moisture flux and latent heat flux at the interface between the host model and the turbulence parameterization. This error can be prevented by applying the same (correct) relationship throughout the entire model. Two additional types of conservation error that result from correcting the surface moisture flux and clipping negative water concentrations can be avoided by using mass-conserving fixers. With all four error sources addressed, the water conservation error in the V1 model becomes negligible and insensitive to the horizontal resolution. The associated changes in the long-term statistics of the main atmospheric features are small. A sensitivity analysis is carried out to show that the magnitudes of the conservation errors in early V1 versions decrease strongly with temporal resolution but increase with horizontal resolution. The increased vertical resolution in V1 results in a very thin model layer at the Earth's surface, which amplifies the conservation error associated with the surface moisture flux correction. We note that for some of the identified error sources, the proposed fixers are remedies rather than solutions to the problems at their roots. Future improvements in time integration would be beneficial for V1.

Because weather and climate models must capture a wide variety of spatial and temporal scales, they rely heavily on parameterizations of subgrid‐scale processes. The goal of this study is to demonstrate that the assumptions used to couple these parameterizations have an important effect on the climate of version 0 of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) General Circulation Model (GCM), a close relative of version 1 of the Community Earth System Model (CESM1). Like most GCMs, parameterizations in E3SM are sequentially split in the sense that parameterizations are called one after another with each subsequent process feeling the effect of the preceding processes. This coupling strategy is noncommutative in the sense that the order in which processes are called impacts the solution. By examining a suite of 24 simulations with deep convection, shallow convection, macrophysics/microphysics, and radiation parameterizations reordered, process order is shown to have a big impact on predicted climate. In particular, reordering of processes induces differences in net climate feedback that are as big as the intermodel spread in phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. One reason why process ordering has such a large impact is that the effect of each process is influenced by the processes preceding it. Where output is written is therefore an important control on apparent model behavior. Application of k‐means clustering demonstrates that the positioning of macro/microphysics and shallow convection plays a critical role on the model solution.

The Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) adopts Cloud Layers Unified By Binormals scheme (CLUBB) and an updated microphysics (MG2) scheme for a more unified treatment of cloud processes. This makes interactions between parameterizations tighter and more explicit. In this study, a cloudy planetary boundary layer (PBL) oscillation related to interaction between CLUBB and MG2 is identified in CAM. This highlights the need for consistency between the coupled sub-grid processes in climate model development. This oscillation occurs most often in the marine cumulus cloud regime. The oscillation occurs only if the modeled PBL is strongly decoupled and precipitation evaporates below the cloud. Two aspects of the parameterized coupling assumptions between CLUBB and MG2 schemes cause the oscillation: 1) a parameterized relationship between rain evaporation and CLUBB's sub-grid spatial variance of moisture and heat that induces an extra cooling in the lower PBL; and 2) rain evaporation which happens at a too low an altitude because of the precipitation fraction parameterization in MG2. Either one of these two conditions can overly stabilize the PBL and reduce the upward moisture transport to the cloud layer so that the PBL collapses. Global simulations prove that turning off the evaporation-variance coupling and improving the precipitation fraction parameterization effectively reduces the cloudy PBL oscillation in marine cumulus clouds. By evaluating the causes of the oscillation in CAM, we have identified the PBL processes that should be examined in models having similar oscillations. This study may draw the attention of the modeling and observational communities to the issue of coupling between parameterized physical processes.

We examine the global water cycle characteristics in the Accelerated Climate Modeling for Energy v0.3 model (a close relative to version 5.3 of the Community Atmosphere Model) in atmosphere-only simulations spanning the years 1980–2005. We evaluate the simulations using a broad range of observational and reanalysis datasets, examine how the simulations change when the horizontal resolution is increased from 1° to 0.25 $$^{\circ }$$ , and compare the simulations against models participating in the the Atmosphere Model Intercomparison Project of the 5th Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). Particular effort has been made to evaluate the model using the best available observational estimates and verifying model biases with additional datasets when differences are known to exist among the observations. Regardless of resolution, the model exhibits several biases: global-mean precipitation, evaporation, and precipitable water are too high, light precipitation occurs too frequently, and the atmospheric residence time of water is too short. Many of these biases are shared by the multi-model mean climate of models participating in CMIP5. The reasons behind regional biases in precipitation are discussed by examining how different fields, such as local evaporation and transport of water vapor, contribute to the bias. Although increasing the horizontal resolution does not drastically change the water cycle, it does lead to a few differences: an increase in global mean precipitation rate, an increase in the fraction of total precipitation that falls over land, more frequent heavy precipitation (>30 mm day $$^{-1}$$ ), and a decrease in precipitable water. One of the most notable changes is the shift of precipitation produced by the convective parameterization to that produced by the large-scale microphysics parameterization. We analyze how changes in moisture and circulation with resolution contribute to this shift in the precipitation partitioning. Because changing horizontal resolution requires some re-tuning, the effect of that tuning was evaluated by performing an additional simulation at 1 $$^{\circ }$$ but using the tunings from the 0.25 $$^{\circ }$$ simulation. The evaluation shows that the more frequent heavy precipitation, the decrease in precipitable water, and the shift from convective to large-scale precipitation are predominantly due to resolution changes, while tuning changes have a major influence on the global mean precipitation and the land/ocean partitioning of precipitation.

Author(s): Rasch, PJ; Xie, S; Ma, PL; Lin, W; Wang, H; Tang, Q; Burrows, SM; Caldwell, P; Zhang, K; Easter, RC; Cameron-Smith, P; Singh, B; Wan, H; Golaz, JC; Harrop, BE; Roesler, E; Bacmeister, J; Larson, VE; Evans, KJ; Qian, Y; Taylor, M; Leung, LR; Zhang, Y; Brent, L; Branstetter, M; Hannay, C; Mahajan, S; Mametjanov, A; Neale, R; Richter, JH; Yoon, JH; Zender, CS; Bader, D; Flanner, M; Foucar, JG; Jacob, R; Keen, N; Klein, SA; Liu, X; Salinger, AG; Shrivastava, M; Yang, Y | Abstract: The Energy Exascale Earth System Model Atmosphere Model version 1, the atmospheric component of the Department of Energy's Energy Exascale Earth System Model is described. The model began as a fork of the well-known Community Atmosphere Model, but it has evolved in new ways, and coding, performance, resolution, physical processes (primarily cloud and aerosols formulations), testing and development procedures now differ significantly. Vertical resolution was increased (from 30 to 72 layers), and the model top extended to 60 km (~0.1 hPa). A simple ozone photochemistry predicts stratospheric ozone, and the model now supports increased and more realistic variability in the upper troposphere and stratosphere. An optional improved treatment of light-absorbing particle deposition to snowpack and ice is available, and stronger connections with Earth system biogeochemistry can be used for some science problems. Satellite and ground-based cloud and aerosol simulators were implemented to facilitate evaluation of clouds, aerosols, and aerosol-cloud interactions. Higher horizontal and vertical resolution, increased complexity, and more predicted and transported variables have increased the model computational cost and changed the simulations considerably. These changes required development of alternate strategies for tuning and evaluation as it was not feasible to “brute force” tune the high-resolution configurations, so short-term hindcasts, perturbed parameter ensemble simulations, and regionally refined simulations provided guidance on tuning and parameterization sensitivity to higher resolution. A brief overview of the model and model climate is provided. Model fidelity has generally improved compared to its predecessors and the CMIP5 generation of climate models.

A large, long-standing, and pervasive climate model bias is excessive absorbed shortwave radiation (ASR) over the midlatitude oceans, especially the Southern Ocean. This study investigates both the underlying mechanisms for and climate impacts of this bias within the Community Earth System Model, version 1, with the Community Atmosphere Model, version 5 [CESM1(CAM5)]. Excessive Southern Ocean ASR in CESM1(CAM5) results in part because low-level clouds contain insufficient amounts of supercooled liquid. In a present-day atmosphere-only run, an observationally motivated modification to the shallow convection detrainment increases supercooled cloud liquid, brightens low-level clouds, and substantially reduces the Southern Ocean ASR bias. Tuning to maintain global energy balance enables reduction of a compensating tropical ASR bias. In the resulting preindustrial fully coupled run with a brighter Southern Ocean and dimmer tropics, the Southern Ocean cools and the tropics warm. As a result of the enhanced meridional temperature gradient, poleward heat transport increases in both hemispheres (especially the Southern Hemisphere), and the Southern Hemisphere atmospheric jet strengthens. Because northward cross-equatorial heat transport reductions occur primarily in the ocean (80%), not the atmosphere (20%), a proposed atmospheric teleconnection linking Southern Ocean ASR bias reduction and cooling with northward shifts in tropical precipitation has little impact. In summary, observationally motivated supercooled liquid water increases in shallow convective clouds enable large reductions in long-standing climate model shortwave radiation biases. Of relevance to both model bias reduction and climate dynamics, quantifying the influence of Southern Ocean cooling on tropical precipitation requires a model with dynamic ocean heat transport.

Single-column model (SCM) capability is an important tool for general circulation model development. In this study, the SCM mode of version 5 of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM5) is shown to handle aerosol initialization and advection improperly, resulting in aerosol, cloud-droplet, and ice crystal concentrations which are typically much lower than observed or simulated by CAM5 in global mode. This deficiency has a major impact on stratiform cloud simulations but has little impact on convective case studies because aerosol is currently not used by CAM5 convective schemes and convective cases are typically longer in duration (so initialization is less important). By imposing fixed aerosol or cloud-droplet and crystal number concentrations, the aerosol issues described above can be avoided. Sensitivity studies using these idealizations suggest that the Meyers et al. (1992) ice nucleation scheme prevents mixed-phase cloud from existing by producing too many ice crystals. Microphysics is shown to strongly deplete cloud water in stratiform cases, indicating problems with sequential splitting in CAM5 and the need for careful interpretation of output from sequentially split climate models. Droplet concentration in the general circulation model (GCM) version of CAM5 is also shown to be far too low (~ 25 cm−3) at the southern Great Plains (SGP) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) site.

Atmospheric measurements from the Arctic Summer Cloud Ocean Study (ASCOS) are used to evaluate the performance of three atmospheric reanalyses (European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting (ECMWF)-Interim reanalysis, National Center for Environmental Prediction (NCEP)-National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) reanalysis, and NCEP-DOE (Department of Energy) reanalysis) and two global climate models (CAM5 (Community Atmosphere Model 5) and NASA GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies) ModelE2) in simulation of the high Arctic environment. Quantities analyzed include near surface meteorological variables such as temperature, pressure, humidity and winds, surface-based estimates of cloud and precipitation properties, the surface energy budget, and lower atmospheric temperature structure. In general, the models perform well in simulating large-scale dynamical quantities such as pressure and winds. Near-surface temperature and lower atmospheric stability, along with surface energy budget terms, are not as well represented due largely to errors in simulation of cloud occurrence, phase and altitude. Additionally, a development version of CAM5, which features improved handling of cloud macro physics, has demonstrated to improve simulation of cloud properties and liquid water amount. The ASCOS period additionally provides an excellent example of the benefits gained by evaluating individual budget terms, rather than simply evaluating the net end product, with large compensating errors between individual surface energy budget terms that result in the best net energy budget.