Climate Dynamics

, Volume 29, Issue 2–3, pp 305–317 | Cite as

Polar amplification as a preferred response in an idealized aquaplanet GCM

  • Peter L. LangenEmail author
  • Vladimir A. Alexeev


An aquaplanet atmospheric general circulation model (GCM) coupled to a mixed layer ocean is analyzed in terms of its polar amplified surface temperature response to a 2×CO2-like steady forcing and in terms of the phase space trajectory of the relaxation of a free perturbation to equilibrium. In earlier studies concerned with linear stability analysis of the same system we have shown that the least stable mode of the linearized surface budget operator has a polar amplified shape. We demonstrate that this shape of the least stable mode is responsible for the polar amplified shape of the response to a uniform forcing and for the manner in which the system relaxes back to equilibrium. Based on GCM and simple energy balance model results it is argued that the decay time-scale of this mode is determined by the sensitivity of the net top-of-atmosphere radiation to surface temperature while its shape (and thus the degree of polar amplification in a climate change experiment) is determined by the sensitivity of poleward heat transports to low- and high-latitude temperatures by the faster time-scale atmospheric dynamics. This implies that the underlying mechanisms for the polar amplification may be obscured when studying feedbacks during the slow evolution of climate change or considering only the new equilibrium state after introduction of a steady forcing.


General Circulation Model Heat Transport Outgoing Longwave Radiation Stable Mode Energy Balance Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This research is supported by the Carlsberg Foundation and National Science Foundation Agreement No. ARC-0327664. This work was supported in part by a grant of HPC resources from the Arctic Region Supercomputing Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks as part of the Department of Defense High Performance Computing Modernization Program. The suggestions by two anonymous reviewers substantially improved both the content and the clarity of the manuscript.


  1. ACIA (2004) Impacts of a warming Arctic: Arctic climate impact assessment. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexeev VA (2003) Sensitivity to CO2 doubling of an atmospheric GCM coupled to an oceanic mixed layer: a linear analysis. Clim Dyn 20:775–787Google Scholar
  3. Alexeev VA, Langen PL, Bates JR (2005) Polar amplification of surface warming on an aquaplanet in "ghost forcing" experiments without sea ice feedbacks. Clim Dyn.  doi:10.1007/s00382-005-0018-3
  4. Arrhenius S (1896) On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground. Phil Mag 41:237–276Google Scholar
  5. Boer GJ (1995) Some dynamical consequences of greenhouse gas warming. Atmos Ocean 33:731–751Google Scholar
  6. Budyko M (1969) The effect of solar radiation variations on the climate of the Earth. Tellus 21(5):611–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caballero R, Langen PL (2005) The dynamic range of poleward energy transport in an atmospheric general circulation model. Geophys Res Lett 32:L02705.  doi:10.1029/2004GL021581
  8. Cai M (2005) Dynamical amplification of polar warming. Geophys Res Lett 32:L22710.  doi:10.1029/2005GL024481
  9. Cai M (2006) Dynamical greenhouse-plus feedback and polar warming amplification. Part I: a dry radiative-transportive climate model. Clim Dyn 26:661–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Colman R (2002) Geographical contributions to global climate sensitivity in a general circulation model. Glob Planet Change 32:211–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Graversen RG (2006) Do changes in the midlatitude circulation have any impact on the Arctic surface air temperature trend? J Clim 19:5422–5438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hall A (2004) The role of surface albedo feedback in climate. J Clim 17:1550–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hall A, Qu X (2006) Using the current seasonal cycle to constrain snow albedo feedback in future climate change. Geophys Res Lett 33:L03502.  doi:10.1029/2005GL025127
  14. Hansen J, Sato M, Ruedy R, Nazarenko L, Lacis A, Schmidt GA, Russell G, Aleinov I, Bauer M, Bauer S, Bell N, Cairns B, Canuto V, Chandler M, Cheng Y, Del Genio A, Faluvegi G, Fleming E, Friend A, Hall T, Jackman C, Kelley M, Kiang N, Koch D, Lean J, Lerner J, Lo K, Menon S, Miller R, Minnis P, Novakov T, Oinas V, Perlwitz J, Perlwitz J, Rind D, Romanou A, Shindell D, Stone P, Sun S, Tausnev N, Thresher D, Wielicki B, Wong T, Yao M, Zhang S (2006) Efficacy of climate forcings. J Geophys Res 110(D18104)Google Scholar
  15. Holland MM, Bitz CM (2003) Polar amplification of climate change in coupled models. Clim Dyn 21:221–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoskins BJ, Karoly DJ (1981) The steady linear response of a spherical atmosphere to thermal and orographic forcing. J Atmos Sci 38:1179–1196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kiehl JT, Hack JJ, Bonan GB, Boville BA, Briegleb BP, Williamson DL, Rasch PJ (1996) Description of the NCAR Community Climate Model (CCM3). Technical Report TN-420, CGD, National Center for Atmospheric ResearchGoogle Scholar
  18. Langen PL, Alexeev VA (2004) Multiple equilibria and asymmetric climates in the CCM3 coupled to an oceanic mixed layer with thermodynamic sea ice. Geophys Res Lett 31.  doi: 10.1029/2003GL019039
  19. Langen PL, Alexeev VA (2005) Estimating 2 × CO2 warming in an aquaplanet GCM using the fluctuation–dissipation theorem. Geophys Res Lett 32.  doi: 10.1029/2005GL024136
  20. Manabe S, Wetherald RT (1980) On the distribution of climate change resulting from an increase in the CO2 content of the atmosphere. J Atmos Sci 37:99–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Masson-Delmotte V, Kageyama M, Braconnot P, Charbit S, Krinner G, Ritz C, Guilyardi E, Jouzel J, Abe-Ouchi A, Crucifix M, Gladstone RM, Hewitt CD, Kitoh A, LeGrande AN, Marti O, Merkel U, Motoi T, Ohgaito R, Otto-Bliesner B, Peltier WR, Ross I, Valdes PJ, Vettoretti G, Weber SL, Wolk F, Yu Y (2006) Past and future polar amplification of climate change: climate model intercomparisons and ice-core constraints. Clim Dyn 26:513–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. North GR (1975) Theory of energy-balance climate models. J Atmos Sci 32:2033–2043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Qu X, Hall A (2006) Assessing snow albedo feedback in simulated climate change. J Clim 19:2617–2630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rodgers KB, Lohmann G, Lorenz S, Schneider R, Henderson GM (2003) A tropical mechanism for Northern Hemisphere deglaciation. Geochem Geophys Geosys 4(5):1046.  doi:10.1029/2003GC000508 Google Scholar
  25. Schneider EK, Lindzen RS, Kirtman BP (1997) A tropical influence on global climate. J Atmos Sci 54:1349–1358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schneider EK, Kirtman BP, Lindzen RS (1999) Tropospheric water vapor and climate sensitivity. J Atmos Sci 56:1649–1658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sellers WD (1969) A global climatic model based on the energy balance of the Earth–atmosphere system. J Appl Meteor 8:392–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shine KP, Cook J, Highwood EJ, Joshi MM (2003) An alternative to radiative forcing for estimating the relative importance of climate change mechanisms. Geophys Res Lett 30(20):2047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sluijs A, Schouten S, Pagani M, Woltering M, Brinkhuis H, Damsté JSS, Dickens GR, Huber M, Reichart G-J, Stein R, Matthiessen J, Lourens LJ, Pedentchouk N, Backman J, Moran K, the Expedition 302 Scientists (2006) Subtropical Arctic Ocean temperatures during the Palaeocene/Eocene thermal maximum. Nature 441:610–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Soden BJ, Broccoli AJ, Hemler RS (2004) On the use of cloud forcing to estimate cloud feedback. J Clim 17:3661–3665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Solomon A (2006) Impact of latent heat release on polar climate. Geophys Res Lett 33:L07716.  doi:10.1029/2005GL025607
  32. Wallace JM, Gutzler DS (1981) Teleconnections in the geopotential height field during the Northern Hemisphere winter. Mon Weather Rev 109:785–812Google Scholar
  33. Weaver CP (2003) Efficiency of storm tracks an important climate parameter? The role of cloud radiative forcing in poleward heat transport. J Geophys Res 108Google Scholar
  34. Winton M (2006) Amplified Arctic climate change: What does surface albedo feedback have to do with it? Geophys Res Lett 33:L03701.  doi:10.1029/2005GL025244
  35. Zachos JC, Pagani M, Sloan LC, Thomas E, Billups K (2001) Trends, rhythms and aberrations in global climate 65 Ma to present. Science 292:686–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ice and Climate Research, Niels Bohr InstituteUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen ODenmark
  2. 2.International Arctic Research CenterUniversity of Alaska FairbanksFairbanksUSA

Personalised recommendations