Climate Models Out Of Whack …Also Warming From Arctic Soot Underestimated

What follows is another report on how it’s “back-to-the drawing-board” for climate models.
==============================================

Climate models underestimate soot amounts and their warming effect in the Arctic

By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(Translation/editing of German text by P Gosselin)

Soot (black carbon aerosol) is a climate warming aerosol. Some years ago we recognized that soot warms far more than earlier assumed. Thus we should have deducted a part of the warming of the past 150 years from CO₂ and assigned it to soot. But that was not allowed politically, and so the models were fudged to make CO₂ a powerful climate factor in the end. A rotten compromise which we already described 5 years ago in our book “Die kalte Sonne”.

What’s the latest in the research of soot? Already in 2013 in PNAS a paper appeared authored by von Thomas Painter et al investigating the surprisingly early and abrupt glacier retreats in the Alps. When studying the ice they found a strong increase in soot from this time, which had something to do with the start of the Industrial Revolution in the mid 19th century.

The authors concluded that the melting of the Alps glaciers was impacted significantly by the rise in soot. Here’s the abstract:

End of the Little Ice Age in the Alps forced by industrial black carbon
Glaciers in the European Alps began to retreat abruptly from their mid-19th century maximum, marking what appeared to be the end of the Little Ice Age. Alpine temperature and precipitation records suggest that glaciers should instead have continued to grow until circa 1910. Radiative forcing by increasing deposition of industrial black carbon to snow may represent the driver of the abrupt glacier retreats in the Alps that began in the mid-19th century. Ice cores indicate that black carbon concentrations increased abruptly in the mid-19th century and largely continued to increase into the 20th century, consistent with known increases in black carbon emissions from the industrialization of Western Europe. Inferred annual surface radiative forcings increased stepwise to 13–17 W⋅m⁻² between 1850 and 1880, and to 9–22 W⋅m⁻² in the early 1900s, with snowmelt season (April/May/June) forcings reaching greater than 35 W⋅m⁻² by the early 1900s. These snowmelt season radiative forcings would have resulted in additional annual snow melting of as much as 0.9 m water equivalent across the melt season. Simulations of glacier mass balances with radiative forcing-equivalent changes in atmospheric temperatures result in conservative estimates of accumulating negative mass balances of magnitude −15 m water equivalent by 1900 and −30 m water equivalent by 1930, magnitudes and timing consistent with the observed retreat. These results suggest a possible physical explanation for the abrupt retreat of glaciers in the Alps in the mid-19th century that is consistent with existing temperature and precipitation records and reconstructions.”

Today thanks to satellite measurements, we have a more exact, full surface picture of glacier albedo. However here there are “cases” that dodge this. This is how Dartmouth College im October 2015 admitted that the supposed changes in albedo in northern Greenland were not in any way real, but could be traced back to a worsening of the satellite sensors, i.e. an artefact of measurement.

In March 2016 a more precise evaluation by a team led by Marco Tedesco appeared in the The Cryosphere. They found a slight decrease in albedo in Greenland over the time period 1981-2012, whereby during the 1981-1996 period there was no detectable trend. Soot measurements from northern Finnland provided hope. In the last 40 years soot concentration in the atmosphere dropped steadily thanks to falling emissions.

The Japanese research center RIKEN made a complaint in May 2016 that climate models assumed too little soot in the Arctic regions. In reality there was far more:

Current atmospheric models underestimate the dirtiness of Arctic air

Black carbon aerosols—particles of carbon that rise into the atmosphere when biomass, agricultural waste, and fossil fuels are burned in an incomplete way—are important for understanding climate change, as they absorb sunlight, leading to higher atmospheric temperatures, and can also coat Arctic snow with a darker layer, reducing its reflectivity and leading to increased melting. Unfortunately, current simulation models, which combine global climate models with aerosol transport models, consistently underestimate the amount of these aerosols in the Arctic compared to actual measurements during the spring and winter seasons, making it difficult to accurately assess the impact of these substances on the climate.

To find out if these inaccuracies could be mitigated, a team of scientists decided to use the Japanese K computer to perform fine-grained simulations of how black carbon aerosols are transported to and distributed in the Arctic region. By using smaller grids—with spacing of just a few kilometers rather than several tens of kilometers as in conventional current models—they were able to show that they could more realistically model the amount of black carbon aerosols, mitigating the underestimation in more coarse-grained models. Their finest model used 3.5 kilometer grids broken up vertically into 38 layers, so that it required 1.6 billion grids to cover the globe. The simulation, done on the 10-petaflop K computer, still required 17 hours to perform the two week simulation.

According to Yousuke Sato of the RIKEN Advanced Institute for Computational Science (AICS), ‘this research shows that powerful supercomputers, by performing more fine-grained simulations, can help us to model weather and climate patterns in a more realistic way. We have to note, however, that while our model reduced the underestimation, it did not completely eliminate it. Further generations of even more powerful computers will allow us to run simulations that may be able to make even more realistic simulations and help us to understand the mechanism through which these aerosols are transported.’

‘It is also known,’ continues Sato, ‘that current models do not realistically model the vertical distribution of the aerosols, and we believe that finer measurements could help there as well. Unfortunately there were no vertical measurements taken in November 2011, the time we chose to model, so we plan in the future to do simulations for time periods for which actual measurement data exist.’

The research, published in Scientific Reports, was carried out by AICS in collaboration with the University of Tokyo, the National Institute of Environmental Studies, Kyushu University, and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency.

Reference: Yousuke Sato, Hiroaki Miura, Hisashi Yashiro, Daisuke Goto, Toshihiko Takemura, Hirofumi Tomita, and Teruyuki Nakajima, ‘Unrealistically pristine air in the Arctic produced by current global scale models’, Scientific Reports, doi: 10.1038/srep26561″

The consequences of the climate model misassumptions are clear: Less soot in the models also means less warming by soot. This is how the observed Arctic warming can be foremost assigned to CO₂.

If one now increases the soot in the models, then it becomes necessary to deduct a part of the warming effect from CO₂, and of course CO₂-climate sensitivity drops accordingly. No matter where one looks, CO₂ keeps taking a greater share of the climate cake than it should. It’s an error that is systematic.