Climate Dynamics

, Volume 39, Issue 1–2, pp 95–112

Assessment of atmosphere-ocean general circulation model simulations of winter northern hemisphere atmospheric blocking



An assessment of six coupled Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Models (AOGCMs) is undertaken in order to evaluate their ability in simulating winter atmospheric blocking highs in the northern hemisphere. The poor representation of atmospheric blocking in climate models is a long-standing problem (e.g. D’Andrea et al. in Clim Dyn 4:385–407, 1998), and despite considerable effort in model development, there is only a moderate improvement in blocking simulation. A modified version of the Tibaldi and Molteni (in Tellus A 42:343–365, 1990) blocking index is applied to daily averaged 500 hPa geopotential fields, from the ERA-40 reanalysis and as simulated by the climate models, during the winter periods from 1957 to 1999. The two preferred regions of blocking development, in the Euro-Atlantic and North Pacific, are relatively well captured by most of the models. However, the prominent error in blocking simulations consists of an underestimation of the total frequency of blocking episodes over both regions. A more detailed analysis revealed that this error was due to an insufficient number of medium spells and long-lasting episodes, and a shift in blocking lifetime distributions towards shorter blocks in the Euro-Atlantic sector. In the Pacific, results are more diverse; the models are equally likely to overestimate or underestimate the frequency at different spell lengths. Blocking spatial signatures are relatively well simulated in the Euro-Atlantic sector, while errors in the intensity and geographical location of the blocks emerge in the Pacific. The impact of models’ systematic errors on blocking simulation has also been analysed. The time-mean atmospheric circulation biases affect the frequency of blocking episodes, and the maximum event duration in the Euro-Atlantic region, while they sometimes cause geographical mislocations in the Pacific sector. The analysis of the systematic error in time-variability has revealed a negative relationship between the high-frequency variability of the transient eddies in the areas affected by blocking and blocking frequency. The blocking responses to errors in the low-frequency variability are different according to the region considered; the amplitude of the low-frequency variability is positively related to the blocking frequency and persistence in the Euro-Atlantic sector, while no such consistency is observed in the Pacific.


Atmospheric blocking AOGCMs Model evaluation Northern hemisphere Winter 


  1. Anderson JL (1993) The climatology of blocking in a numerical forecast model. J Clim 6:1041–1056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Austin J (1980) The blocking of middle latitude westerly winds by planetary waves. Q J R Meteorol Soc 106:327–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barriopedro D, Garcia-Herrera R, Lupo AR, Hernandez E (2006) A climatology of northern hemisphere blocking. J Clim. doi:10.1007/s00382-010-0767-5
  4. Barriopedro D, Garcia-Herrera R, Trigo RM (2010) Application of blocking diagnosis methods to general circulation models. Part i: a novel detection scheme. Clim Dyn 19:1042–1063Google Scholar
  5. Berner J, Doblas-Reyes FJ, N PT, Shutts G, Weisheimer A (2008) Impact of a quasi-stochastic cellular automaton backscatter scheme on the systematic error and seasonal prediction skill of a global climate model. Tech. Rep. D1.13, ECMWFGoogle Scholar
  6. Boer GP, Arpe K, Blackburn M, Deque M, Gates WL, Hart TL, Le Treut H, Rockner E, Sheinin DA, Simmonds I, Smith RNB, Tokioka T, Wetherald RT, Williamson DL (1992) An intercomparison of the climates simulated by 14 atmospheric general circulation models. J Geophys Res 97:12,771–12,786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brankovic C, Molteni F (1997) Sensitivity of the ECMWF model northern winter climate to model formulation. Clim Dyn 13:75–101Google Scholar
  8. Carrera ML, Higgins RW, Kousky VE (2004) Downstream weather impacts associated with atmospheric blocking over the northeast pacific. J Clim 17:4823–4839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D’Andrea F, Tibaldi S, Blackburn M, Boer G, Déqué M, Dix M, Dugas B, Ferranti L, Iwasaki T, Kitoh A, Pope V, Randall D, Roeckner E, Straus D, Stern W, Den Dool HV, Williamson D (1998) Northern hemisphere atmospheric blocking as simulated by 15 atmospheric general circulation models in the period 1979-1988. Clim Dyn 4:385–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Doblas-Reyes FJ, Deque M, Valero F, Stephenson DB (1998) North Atlantic wintertime intraseasonal variability and its sensitivity to GCM horizontal resolution. Tellus 50A:573–595Google Scholar
  11. Doblas-Reyes FJ, Casado MJ, Pastor MA (2002) Sensitivity of the northern hemisphere blocking frequency to the detection index. J Geophys Res 107. doi:10.1029/2000JD000290
  12. Ferranti L, Molteni F, Brankovic C, Palmer TN (1994) Diagnosis of extra-tropical variabilit in seasonal integrations of the ECMWF model. J Clim 7:849–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferranti L, Molteni F, Palmer TN (1994) Impact of localized tropical sst anomalies in ensembles of seasonal gcm integrations. Q J R Meteorol Soc 120:1613–1645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Green J (1977) The weather during july 1976: some dynamical considerations of the drought. Weather 32:120–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grose WL, Hoskins BJ (1979) On the influence of orography on large-scale atmospheric flow. J Atmos Sci 36:223–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hinton TJ, Hoskins BJ, Martin GM (2009) The influence of tropical sea surface temperatures and precipitation on north Pacific atmospheric blocking. Clim Dyn 33:549–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoskins BJ, Sardeshmukh PD (1987) A diagnostic study of the dynamics of the northern hemisphere winter of 1985–1986. Q J R Meteorol Soc 113:759–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Illari L (1984) A diagnostic study of the potential vorticity in a warm blocking anticyclone. J Atmos Sci 41:3518–3526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jung T (2005) Systematic errors of the atmospheric circulation in the ECMWF forecasting system. Q J R Meteorol Soc 131:1045–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kalnay E, Kanamitsu M, Kistler R, Collins W, Deaven D, Gandin L, Iredell M, Saha S, White G, Wollen J, Zhu Y, Chelliah M, Ebisuzaki W, Higgins W, Janowiak J, Mo KC, Ropelewski C, J W, Leetmaa A, Reynolds R, Jenne R, Joseph D (1996) The NCEP/NCAR 40-year reanalysis project. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 77:437–471Google Scholar
  21. Matsueda M, Mizuta R, Kusunoki S (2009) Future change in wintertime atmospheric blocking simulated using a 20-km-mesh atmospheric global circulation model. J Geophys Res 114:D12114. doi:10.1029/2009JD011919
  22. Namias J (1947) Characteristics of the general circulation over the northern hemisphere during the abnormal winter 1946–47. Mon Weather Rev 75:145–152Google Scholar
  23. Palmer TN (2001) A nonlinear dynamical perspective on model error: a proposal for non-local stochastic-dynamic parametrization in weather and climate prediction models. Q J R Meteorol Soc 127:279–303Google Scholar
  24. Pelly J, Hoskins B (2003) A new perspective on blocking. J Atmos Sci 60:743–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rex D (1950) Blocking action in the middle troposphere and its effect upon regional climate. Part 1: an aerological study of blocking action. Tellus 42:196–211Google Scholar
  26. Rex D (1950) Blocking action in the middle troposphere and its effect upon regional climate. Part 2: the climatology of blocking action. Tellus 2:275–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ringer MA, Martin GM, Greeves CZ, Hinton TJ, James PM, Pope VD, Scaife AA, Stratton RA (2006) The physical properties of the atmosphere in the new Hadley Centre global environmental model (HadGEM1). Part II: aspects of variability and regional climate. J Clim 19:1302–1326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sausen R, Konig W, Sielman WF (1995) Analysis of blocking events from observations and echam model simulations. Tellus A 47:421–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Scaife AA, Knight JR (2008) Ensemble simulations of the cold European winter of 2005–2006. Q J R Meteorol Soc 134:1647–1659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Scaife AA, Woolings TJ, Knight JR, Martin GM, Hinton TJ (2010) Atmospheric blocking and mean biases in climate models. J Clim 23:6143–6152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Scherrer S, Croci-Maspoli M, Schwierz C, Appenzeller C (2006) Two-dimensional indices of atmospheric blocking and their statistical relationship with winter climate patterns in the Euro-Atlantic region. Int J Climatol 26:233–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shutts GJ (1983) The propagation of eddies in diffluent jetstreams: Eddy vorticity forcing of blocking flow fields. Q J R Meteorol Soc 109(462):737–761Google Scholar
  33. Shutts GJ (1986) A case study of eddy forcing during an Atlantic blocking episode. Adv Geophys 29:135–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sillmann J, Croci-Maspoli M (2009) Present and future atmospheric blocking and its impact on European mean and extreme climate. Geophys Res Lett 36:L10702. doi:10.1029/2009GL038259
  35. Slingo JM, Sperber KR, Boyle JS, Ceron JP, Dix M, Dugas B, Ebisuzaki W, Fyfe J, Gregory D, Gueremy JF, Hack J, Harzallah A, Inness P, Kitoh A, Lau WM, McAvaney B, Madden R, Matthews A, Palmer TN, Park CK, Randall D, Renno N (1996) Intraseasonal oscillations in 15 atmospheric general circulation models: results from an AMIP diagnostic subproject. Clim Dyn 12:325–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tibaldi S, Molteni F (1990) On the operational predictability of blocking. Tellus A 42:343–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tibaldi S, D’Andrea F, Tosi E, Roeckner E (1997) Climatology of northern hemisphere blocking in the ECHAM model. Clim Dyn 13:649–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Treidl R, Birch E, Sajecki P (1981) Blocking action in the northern hemisphere: a climatological study. Atmos Ocean 19:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Trigo R, Trigo I, DaCamara C, Osborn T (2004) Climate impact of the european winter blocking episodes from the ncep/ncar reanalyses. Clim Dyn 23:17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tung KK, Lindzen RS (1979) A theory of stationary long waves. Part I: A simple theory of blocking. Mon Weather Rev 107:714–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Williamson DL, Olson JG (1998) A comparison of semi-Lagrangian and Eulerian polar climate simulations. Mon Weather Rev 126:991–1000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Williamson DL, Olson JG, Boville BA (1998) A comparison of semi-Lagrangian and Eulerian tropical climate simulations. Mon Weather Rev 126:1001–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Climatic Research Unit, School of Environmental SciencesUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK

Personalised recommendations