2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- ItemSensitivity of polar stratospheric ozone loss to uncertainties in chemical reaction kinetics(Göttingen : Copernicus GmbH, 2009) Kawa, S.R.; Stolarski, R.S.; Newman, P.A.; Douglass, A.R.; Rex, M.; Hofmann, D.J.; Santee, M.L.; Frieler, K.The impact and significance of uncertainties in model calculations of stratospheric ozone loss resulting from known uncertainty in chemical kinetics parameters is evaluated in trajectory chemistry simulations for the Antarctic and Arctic polar vortices. The uncertainty in modeled ozone loss is derived from Monte Carlo scenario simulations varying the kinetic (reaction and photolysis rate) parameters within their estimated uncertainty bounds. Simulations of a typical winter/spring Antarctic vortex scenario and Match scenarios in the Arctic produce large uncertainty in ozone loss rates and integrated seasonal loss. The simulations clearly indicate that the dominant source of model uncertainty in polar ozone loss is uncertainty in the Cl2O 2 photolysis reaction, which arises from uncertainty in laboratory-measured molecular cross sections at atmospherically important wavelengths. This estimated uncertainty in JCl 2O2 from laboratory measurements seriously hinders our ability to model polar ozone loss within useful quantitative error limits. Atmospheric observations, however, suggest that the Cl2O2 photolysis uncertainty may be less than that derived from the lab data. Comparisons to Match, South Pole ozonesonde, and Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) data all show that the nominal recommended rate simulations agree with data within uncertainties when the Cl2O2 photolysis error is reduced by a factor of two, in line with previous in situ ClOx measurements. Comparisons to simulations using recent cross sections from Pope et al. (2007) are outside the constrained error bounds in each case. Other reactions producing significant sensitivity in polar ozone loss include BrO + ClO and its branching ratios. These uncertainties challenge our confidence in modeling polar ozone depletion and projecting future changes in response to changing halogen emissions and climate. Further laboratory, theoretical, and possibly atmospheric studies are needed.
- ItemGlobal and regional effects of land-use change on climate in 21st century simulations with interactive carbon cycle(Göttingen : Copernicus GmbH, 2014) Boysen, L.R.; Brovkin, V.; Arora, V.K.; Cadule, P.; De Noblet-Ducoudré, N.; Kato, E.; Pongratz, J.; Gayler, V.Biogeophysical (BGP) and biogeochemical (BGC) effects of land-use and land cover change (LULCC) are separated at the global and regional scales in new interactive CO2simulations for the 21st century. Results from four earth system models (ESMs) are analyzed for the future RCP8.5 scenario from simulations with and without land-use and land cover change (LULCC), contributing to the Land-Use and Climate, IDentification of robust impacts (LUCID) project. Over the period 2006-2100, LULCC causes the atmospheric CO2concentration to increase by 12, 22, and 66 ppm in CanESM2, MIROC-ESM, and MPI-ESM-LR, respectively. Statistically significant changes in global near-surface temperature are found in three models with a BGC-induced global mean annual warming between 0.07 and 0.23 K. BGP-induced responses are simulated by three models in areas of intense LULCC of varying sign and magnitude (between g 0.47 and 0.10 K). Modifications of the land carbon pool by LULCC are disentangled in accordance with processes that can lead to increases and decreases in this carbon pool. Global land carbon losses due to LULCC are simulated by all models: 218, 57, 35 and 34 Gt C by MPI-ESM-LR, MIROC-ESM, IPSL-CM5A-LR and CanESM2, respectively. On the contrary, the CO2-fertilization effect caused by elevated atmospheric CO2concentrations due to LULCC leads to a land carbon gain of 39 Gt C in MPI-ESM-LR and is almost negligible in the other models. A substantial part of the spread in models' responses to LULCC is attributed to the differences in implementation of LULCC (e.g., whether pastures or crops are simulated explicitly) and the simulation of specific processes. Simple idealized experiments with clear protocols for implementing LULCC in ESMs are needed to increase the understanding of model responses and the statistical significance of results, especially when analyzing the regional-scale impacts of LULCC.