Advertisement

Climate Dynamics

, Volume 45, Issue 9–10, pp 2847–2860 | Cite as

Deconstructing the climate change response of the Northern Hemisphere wintertime storm tracks

  • B. J. Harvey
  • L. C. Shaffrey
  • T. J. Woollings
Article

Abstract

There are large uncertainties in the circulation response of the atmosphere to climate change. One manifestation of this is the substantial spread in projections for the extratropical storm tracks made by different state-of-the-art climate models. In this study we perform a series of sensitivity experiments, with the atmosphere component of a single climate model, in order to identify the causes of the differences between storm track responses in different models. In particular, the Northern Hemisphere wintertime storm tracks in the CMIP3 multi-model ensemble are considered. A number of potential physical drivers of storm track change are identified and their influence on the storm tracks is assessed. The experimental design aims to perturb the different physical drivers independently, by magnitudes representative of the range of values present in the CMIP3 model runs, and this is achieved via perturbations to the sea surface temperature and the sea-ice concentration forcing fields. We ask the question: can the spread of projections for the extratropical storm tracks present in the CMIP3 models be accounted for in a simple way by any of the identified drivers? The results suggest that, whilst the changes in the upper-tropospheric equator-to-pole temperature difference have an influence on the storm track response to climate change, the large spread of projections for the extratropical storm track present in the northern North Atlantic in particular is more strongly associated with changes in the lower-tropospheric equator-to-pole temperature difference.

Keywords

Storm tracks Climate change CMIP3 Drivers of change Polar amplification 

Notes

Acknowledgments

BJH was supported by the Natural Environment Research Councils Project Testing and Evaluating Model Predictions of European Storms (TEMPEST) during the course of this work. The authors acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme’s Working Group on Coupled Modelling, which is responsible for CMIP, and we thank the climate modeling groups for producing and making available their model output. For CMIP the U.S. Department of Energy’s Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison provides coordinating support and led development of software infrastructure in partnership with the Global Organization for Earth System Science Portals.

References

  1. Barnes EA, Polvani L (2013) Response of the midlatitude jets, and of their variability, to increased greenhouse gases in the CMIP5 models. J Clim 26:7117–7135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brayshaw DJ, Hoskins B, Blackburn M (2011) The basic ingredients of the North Atlantic storm track. Part II: sea surface temperatures. J Atmos Sci 68:1784–1805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brayshaw DJ, Woollings T, Vellinga M (2009) Tropical and extratropical responses of the North Atlantic atmospheric circulation to a sustained weakening of the MOC. J Clim 22:3146–3155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Butler AH, Thompson DWJ, Heikes R (2010) The steady-state atmospheric circulation response to climate change-like thermal forcings in a simple general circulation model. J Clim 23:3474–3496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang EKM (2009) Are band-pass variance statistics useful measures of storm track activity? Re-examining storm track variability associated with the NAO using multiple storm track measures. Clim Dyn 33:277–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen G, Lu J, Frierson DMW (2008) Phase speed spectra and the latitude of surface westerlies: interannual variability and global warming trend. J Clim 21:5942–5959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen G, Lu J, Sun L (2013) Delineating the eddy-zonal flow interaction in the atmospheric circulation response to climate forcing: uniform SST warming in an idealized aquaplanet model. J Atmos Sci 70:2214–2233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deser C, Walsh JE, Timlin MS (2000) Arctic sea ice variability in the context of recent atmospheric circulation trends. J Clim 13:617–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Drijfhout S, van Oldenburgh GV, Cimatoribus A (2012) Is a decline of AMOC causing the warming hole above the north atlantic in observed and modeled warming patterns? J Clim 25:8373–8379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frierson DMW (2006) Robust increases in midlatitude static stability in simulations of global warming. Geophys Res Lett 33:L24,816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Graff LS, LaCasce JH (2012) Changes in the extratropical storm tracks in response to changes in SST in an AGCM. J Clim 25:1854–1870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hartmann DL, Wallace JM, Limpasuvan V, Thompson DWJ, Holton JR (2000) Can ozone depletion and global warming interact to produce rapid climate change? Proc Natl Acad Sci 97:1412–1417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harvey BJ, Shaffrey LC, Woollings TJ. (2013) Equator-to-pole temperature differences and the extra-tropical storm track responses of the CMIP5 climate models. Clim Dyn 43:1–12Google Scholar
  14. Harvey BJ, Shaffrey LC, Woollings TJ, Zappa G, Hodges KI (2012) How large are projected 21st century storm track changes? Geophys Res Lett 39:L052,873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hoskins BJ, Hodges KI (2002) New perspectives on the Northern Hemisphere winter storm tracks. J Atmos Sci 59:1041–1061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johns TC, Durman CF, Banks HT, Roberts MJ, McLaren AJ, Ridley JK, Senior CA, Williams KD, Jones A, Rickard GJ et al (2006) The new Hadley Centre climate model (HadGEM1): evaluation of coupled simulations. J Clim 19:1327–1353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kidston J, Vallis GK, Dean SM, Renwick JA (2011) Can the increase in the eddy length scale under global warming cause the poleward shift of the jet streams? J Clim 24:3764–3780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kodama C, Iwasaki T (2009) Influence of the SST rise on baroclinic instability wave activity under an aquaplanet condition. J Atmos Sci 66:2272–2287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Laîné A, Kageyama M, Salas-Mélia D, Ramstein G, Planton S, Denvil S, Tyteca S (2009) An energetics study of wintertime Northern Hemisphere storm tracks under 4 × CO2 conditions in two ocean-atmosphere coupled models. J Clim 22:819–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lorenz DJ, DeWeaver ET. (2007) Tropopause height and zonal wind response to global warming in the IPCC scenario integrations. J Geophys Res Atmos 112Google Scholar
  21. Magnusdottir G, Deser C, Saravanan R (2004) The effects of North Atlantic SST and sea ice anomalies on the winter circulation in CCM3. Part I: main features and storm track characteristics of the response. J Clim 17:857–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Martin GM, Ringer MA, Pope VD, Jones A, Dearden C, Hinton TJ (2006) The physical properties of the atmosphere in the new Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model (HadGEM1). Part I: Model description and global climatology. J Clim 19:1274–1301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rivière G (2011) A dynamical interpretation of the poleward shift of the jet streams in global warming scenarios. J Atmos Sci 68:1253–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Scaife ATS, DR Fereday, Cubasch U, Langematz U, Akiyoshi H, Bekki S, Braesicke P, Butchart N, Chipperfield MP et al (2012) Climate change projections and stratosphere–troposphere interactions. Clim Dyn 38:2089–2097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schneider T, O’Gorman PA, Levine XJ (2010) Water vapor and the dynamics of climate changes. Rev Geophys 48:RG3001Google Scholar
  26. Screen JA, Deser C, Simmonds I (2012) Local and remote controls on observed Arctic warming. Geophys Res Lett 39:L10,709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt K, Tignor M, Miller H (eds) (2007) IPCC, 2007: climate change 2007: the physical science basis. In: Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  28. Stroeve J, Holland MM, Meier W, Scambos T, Serreze M (2007) Arctic sea ice decline: faster than forecast. Geophys Res Lett 34Google Scholar
  29. Ulbrich U, Pinto J, Kupfer H, Leckebusch G, Spangehl T, Reyers M (2008) Changing northern hemisphere storm tracks in an ensemble of IPCC climate change simulations. J Clim 21:1669–1679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Williams GP (2006) Circulation sensitivity to tropopause height. J Atmos Sci 63Google Scholar
  31. Wilson C, Sinha B, Williams RG (2009) The effect of ocean dynamics and orography on atmospheric storm tracks. J Clim 22:3689–3702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Woollings T, Blackburn M (2012) The North Atlantic jet stream under climate change and its relation to the NAO and EA patterns. J Clim 25:886–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Woollings T, Gregory JM, Pinto JG, Reyers M, Brayshaw DJ (2012) Response of the North Atlantic storm track to climate change shaped by ocean-atmosphere coupling. Nat Geosci 5:313–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yin JH (2005) A consistent poleward shift of the storm tracks in simulations of 21st century climate. Geophys Res Lett 32:L18,701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zappa G, Shaffrey LC, Hodges KI (2013a) The ability of CMIP5 models to simulate north Atlantic extratropical cyclones. J Clim 26:5379–5396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zappa G, Shaffrey LC, Hodges KI, Sansom PG, Stephenson DB (2013b) A multimodel assessment of future projections of North Atlantic and European Extratropical Cyclones in the CMIP5 climate models. J Clim 26:5846–5862CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. J. Harvey
    • 1
  • L. C. Shaffrey
    • 1
  • T. J. Woollings
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Meteorology, National Centre for Atmospheric ScienceUniversity of ReadingReadingUK
  2. 2.Department of Physics, Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary PhysicsUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations