Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems (Apr 2020)

Implementation of U.K. Earth System Models for CMIP6

  • Alistair A. Sellar,
  • Jeremy Walton,
  • Colin G. Jones,
  • Richard Wood,
  • Nathan Luke Abraham,
  • Miroslaw Andrejczuk,
  • Martin B. Andrews,
  • Timothy Andrews,
  • Alex T. Archibald,
  • Lee deMora,
  • Harold Dyson,
  • Mark Elkington,
  • Richard Ellis,
  • Piotr Florek,
  • Peter Good,
  • Laila Gohar,
  • Stephen Haddad,
  • Steven C. Hardiman,
  • Emma Hogan,
  • Alan Iwi,
  • Christopher D. Jones,
  • Ben Johnson,
  • Douglas I. Kelley,
  • Jamie Kettleborough,
  • Jeff R. Knight,
  • Marcus O. Köhler,
  • Till Kuhlbrodt,
  • Spencer Liddicoat,
  • Irina Linova‐Pavlova,
  • Matthew S. Mizielinski,
  • Olaf Morgenstern,
  • Jane Mulcahy,
  • Erica Neininger,
  • Fiona M. O'Connor,
  • Ruth Petrie,
  • Jeff Ridley,
  • Jean‐Christophe Rioual,
  • Malcolm Roberts,
  • Eddy Robertson,
  • Steven Rumbold,
  • Jon Seddon,
  • Harry Shepherd,
  • Sungbo Shim,
  • Ag Stephens,
  • Joao C. Teixiera,
  • Yongming Tang,
  • Jonny Williams,
  • Andy Wiltshire,
  • Paul T. Griffiths

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001946
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 4
pp. n/a – n/a

Abstract

Read online

Abstract We describe the scientific and technical implementation of two models for a core set of experiments contributing to the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). The models used are the physical atmosphere‐land‐ocean‐sea ice model HadGEM3‐GC3.1 and the Earth system model UKESM1 which adds a carbon‐nitrogen cycle and atmospheric chemistry to HadGEM3‐GC3.1. The model results are constrained by the external boundary conditions (forcing data) and initial conditions. We outline the scientific rationale and assumptions made in specifying these. Notable details of the implementation include an ozone redistribution scheme for prescribed ozone simulations (HadGEM3‐GC3.1) to avoid inconsistencies with the model's thermal tropopause, and land use change in dynamic vegetation simulations (UKESM1) whose influence will be subject to potential biases in the simulation of background natural vegetation. We discuss the implications of these decisions for interpretation of the simulation results. These simulations are expensive in terms of human and CPU resources and will underpin many further experiments; we describe some of the technical steps taken to ensure their scientific robustness and reproducibility.