Search

Global warming is destabilizing the cryosphere, with consequences for glaciers, permafrost, sea ice and lake ice. Polar lakes have short ice‐free seasons, and small changes in ice cover duration have the potential to provoke alterations to ecosystem structure. However, these lakes are understudied, and the consequences for mixing regimes, thermal structures and biogeochemical processes remain unclear. We measured three annual cycles of dissolved oxygen, temperature and specific conductivity in a lake at ∼83°N to investigate limnological processes and their interannual variability. There were sharp interannual contrasts in lake dynamics, with state shifts in mixing, stratification and oxygen regimes due to air temperature variability and meteorological events. We also observed unusual thermal profiles that were associated with solute gradients. These striking differences underscore the sensitivity of high Arctic lakes to interannual variations in meteorological forcing, and their susceptibility to regime shifts in response to ongoing global change. Plain Language Summary: Lakes are biodiversity refuges, climate regulators and providers of ecosystem services. High Arctic lakes experience brief summer ice‐free periods and their annual dynamics remain largely unexplored despite their location in one of the most rapidly warming regions on Earth. In particular, patterns of thermal structure and oxygen dynamics have rarely been measured. We studied three complete annual cycles in a coastal lake less than 100 km south of the northernmost land on Earth. The observed limnological dynamics highlight the potential for rapid regime shifts in polar lakes and underline their sensitivity to interannual differences in environmental conditions. Key Points: Pronounced shifts in lake oxygen and temperature dynamics occur due to interannual air temperature variation and meteorological episodesDivergent annual trajectories in lake structure and functioning highlight the vulnerability of high Arctic lakes to climate change [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arctic sea‐ice loss is influenced by multiple positive feedbacks, sparking concerns of accelerated loss in the coming years or even a tipping point, where a sea‐ice equilibrium disappears at a given CO2 value and sea ice rapidly evolves to a new steady state. Such a tipping point would imply a bi‐stability of the Arctic climate—where multiple steady‐state Arctic climates are possible at the same CO2 value. Previous works have sought to establish the existence of bi‐stability using a range of models, from zero‐dimensional sea ice thermodynamic models to fully coupled global climate models, with conflicting results. Here, we present a new model of the Arctic that includes both sea‐ice thermodynamics and key atmospheric feedbacks in a simple framework. We exploit the model's simplicity to identify physical mechanisms that control the timing and extent of sea‐ice bi‐stability, and the abruptness of ice loss. We show that longwave radiation feedbacks can have a strong influence on Arctic surface climate from atmospheric temperature increases alone, even without major contributions from clear‐sky moisture or convective clouds suggested previously. While winter sea‐ice bi‐stability is robust to changes in uncertain model parameters in this study, summer sea ice is more sensitive. Finally, our model indicates that positive feedbacks may modulate the CO2 threshold of sea‐ice loss and the width of bi‐stability much more strongly than the abruptness of loss. These results lead to a comprehensive understanding of the conditions that favor Arctic sea‐ice bi‐stability, particularly the role of atmospheric feedbacks, in both future and past climates. Plain Language Summary: Arctic sea ice is declining rapidly under global warming, threatening high‐latitude communities and ecologies. Some mechanisms may cause this sea ice loss to accelerate, leading to concerns about the possibility of a sea ice "tipping point," in which ice is lost very abruptly and irreversibly at a threshold value of CO2. Previous works have used a range of tools, from simple sea ice thermodynamic models to state‐of‐the‐art global climate models, to identify whether such a tipping point exists and have found conflicting results. In this work, we present a novel model of the Arctic climate that combines a thermodynamic model of sea ice with atmospheric feedbacks in a simple framework. We run this model across large ranges of climatic conditions to broadly identify the conditions that favor a sea ice tipping point. In addition, we isolate the mechanisms that are key to setting the timing and abruptness of complete sea ice loss, separating the contributions of different atmospheric feedbacks that have previously been unexplored. We find that both summer and winter sea ice tipping points are possible and that the responsible atmospheric mechanisms are different than those that have been suggested previously. Key Points: Winter sea ice bi‐stability is very robust across model parameters, while summer sea ice bi‐stability exists in narrower parameter regimesAtmospheric feedbacks determine the width of the model sea‐ice bi‐stability and the CO2 value at which Arctic sea ice loss occursLongwave feedbacks–a key contributor to the model bi‐stability–are driven more by tropospheric temperature than by clouds or moisture [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change in the Arctic has substantial impacts on human life and ecosystems both within and beyond the Arctic. Our analysis of CMIP6 simulations shows that some climate models project much larger Arctic climate change than other models, including changes in sea ice, ocean mixed layer, air‐sea heat flux, and surface air temperature in wintertime. In particular, dramatic enhancement of Arctic Ocean convection down to a few hundred meters is projected in these models but not in others. Interestingly, these models employ the same ocean model family (NEMO) while the choice of models for the atmosphere and sea ice varies. The magnitude of Arctic climate change is proportional to the strength of the increase in poleward ocean heat transport, which is considerably higher in this group of models. Establishing the plausibility of this group of models with high Arctic climate sensitivity to anthropogenic forcing is imperative given the implied ramifications. Plain Language Summary: Arctic climate is projected to change dramatically in the future based on the latest climate models. However, there is a large discrepancy between these climate models. We find that simulated Arctic climate change tends to be much larger in models using the community ocean model "NEMO" as their ocean component. Future Arctic climate change in winter strongly depends on the strength of the increase in poleward ocean heat transport, which is considerably higher in the NEMO‐family climate models. There are some indications that this group of models can better reproduce the observed winter sea ice decline and mixed layer depth in the Barents Sea in their historical simulations. We suggest that investigating the model physics in the NEMO‐family climate models in comparison with other models may ultimately help to reduce the overall uncertainty in climate change projections. Key Points: Future Arctic climate change in winter strongly depends on the strength of the increase in poleward ocean heat transport (OHT)Arctic climate change in the NEMO‐family climate models is much more pronouncedNEMO‐family climate models have larger increases in poleward OHT [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Year‐to‐year forecasts of the Arctic climate conditions have drawn much interest in recent decades. This study investigates the primary drivers responsible for interannual variations (without multi‐decadal trends) of air temperature at 2 m (T2m) and sea ice concentration (SIC) over the Barents‐Kara Seas (BKS) during September from 1950 to 2021. The Arctic Dipole (AD), a leading factor in the BKS variability, plays an important role via influencing large‐scale atmospheric circulations and local thermodynamical feedbacks (i.e., vapor and albedo feedbacks). During a negative AD phase, the positive surface air temperature advection anomalies warm up the BKS region and promote sea ice melting, which in turn maintains the below‐normal sea ice and warmer‐than‐normal conditions via positive vapor and albedo feedbacks. Moreover, our results suggest that the sea surface temperature (SST) variability in the midlatitudes of the North Atlantic in the preceding month could also be an important driver of the SIC variability over the BKS area. The anomalous temperature advections from the surface to the upper troposphere are accompanied by a Rossby wave‐type atmospheric response, which intensifies the energy exchanges between the ocean and the atmosphere. Local SST anomalies associated with the surface heat flux anomalies further persist in the following month and influence sea ice variations due to their long‐lasting memory. A better understanding of the mechanisms of interannual climate variabilities over the BKS region in boreal early autumn is helpful to improving the Arctic regional climate predictions. Key Points: Understanding primary drivers of the interannual climate variabilities over the Arctic is essential to improve the regional prediction skillsThe Arctic Dipole is mainly responsible for driving the Barents‐Kara Seas (BKS) surface air temperature interannual variability in SeptemberThe North Atlantic sea surface temperature variability at 1‐month lead is associated with the early autumn sea ice cover variability in the BKS region [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding influence of vegetation on past temperature changes in the Arctic region would help isolate uncertainty and build understanding of its broader climate system, with implications for paleoclimate reconstructions and future climate change. Using an Earth system model EC‐Earth, we conduct a series of simulations to investigate the impact of vegetation‐climate feedback on the Arctic climate during the mid‐Holocene. Results show Arctic greening induced by the warming resulting from stronger orbital forcing, further amplifies the Arctic warming. The increased vegetation contributes 0.33°C of Arctic warming and 0.35 × 106 km2 of Arctic sea ice loss. Increased Arctic vegetation leads to reduced land surface albedo and increased evapotranspiration, both of which cause local warming in spring and summer. The resultant sea ice loss causes warming in the following seasons, with atmospheric circulation anomalies further amplifying the warming. Our results highlight the significant contribution of vegetation‐climate feedback to Arctic climate under natural conditions. Plain Language Summary: Vegetation‐climate feedback is an essential process between the terrestrial biosphere and the atmosphere. Greening of the Arctic can be invoked by increased solar radiation, for example, during the mid‐Holocene (6,000 years ago), or increased greenhouse gas, for example, ongoing global warming. Here we perform simulations of vegetation and climate interactions during the mid‐Holocene and demonstrate the impact of vegetation‐climate feedback on the Arctic climate. We show that compared to the pre‐industrial period (1850 CE), the Arctic region experiences an expansion of vegetation under a warm climate due to increased solar radiation during the mid‐Holocene. The greening leads to reduced land albedo and enhanced evapotranspiration. These changes and resultant sea ice loss, in combination with associated atmospheric circulation changes, further amplify the Arctic warming. These changes alone are responsible for 0.33°C increase in surface air temperature and 0.35 × 106 km2 increase in sea ice loss. Given the facts of observed ongoing Arctic greening in recent decades, our modeling results suggest that the effect of the vegetation‐climate feedback will amplify the future Arctic warming and sea ice loss even more. Key Points: The Earth system model EC‐Earth reproduced the expansion of vegetation in northern high latitudes during the mid‐Holocene compared to the PIThe mid‐Holocene Arctic greening contributes 0.33°C increase in annual Arctic warming and 0.35 × 106 km2 of sea ice lossThe increased evapotranspiration and decreased surface albedo due to the Arctic greening amplify the Arctic warming in the growing season [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the annual mean Arctic Amplification (AA) index varied between two and three during the 1970–2000 period, it reached values exceeding four during the first two decades of the 21st century. The AA did not change in a continuous fashion but rather in two sharp increases around 1986 and 1999. During those steps the mean global surface air temperature trend remained almost constant, while the Arctic trend increased. Although the "best" CMIP6 models reproduce the increasing trend of the AA in 1980s they do not capture the sharply increasing trend of the AA after 1999 including its rapid step‐like increase. We propose that the first sharp AA increase around 1986 is due to external forcing, while the second step close to 1999 is due to internal climate variability, which models cannot reproduce in the observed time. Plain Language Summary: The rate of Arctic warming varied in time, while the rate of global warming was nearly constant over the period 1960–2020. This led to a variable Arctic Amplification (AA) defined as a ratio of the Arctic warming trend to mean global warming trend. In addition, the Arctic experienced sudden changes in the rate of warming with step‐like changes in annual mean Arctic Amplification around the years 1986 and 1999. Climate models do not capture the second observed sharp increase of the AA. We suggest that the first AA increase around 1986 is primarily due to external forcing (increasing concentration of carbon dioxide) while the second sharp increase around 1999 is dominated by internal climate variability which current models cannot capture accurately within the time scale of the physical phenomena. Key Points: Annual mean Arctic Amplification (AA) within the period 1970–2020 changed in steep steps around 1986 and 1999. It reached values over 4.0Even those CMIP6 models best at reproducing the AA did not reproduce the second sudden increase near 1999We conjecture that the first AA sharp increase is due to external forcing, while the second is due to internal climate variability [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a well‐known modulator of global climate and is correlated with observed temperature variations over the Barents‐Kara Sea (BKS). However, the origins and causality of this observed correlation are unclear. Here, we show that historical climate model simulations, on average, fail to reproduce the observed ENSO‐BKS correlation. However, individual realizations do show a relationship as observed. We find that the internal variability of BKS sea ice is the main factor between realizations that reproduce the ENSO‐BKS correlation and those that do not. Furthermore, we find that atmospheric model simulations prescribed with observed sea ice variability reproduce the ENSO‐BKS correlation. We conclude that ENSO‐correlated winter BKS temperature variations are dependent on coincidental sea ice changes. Plain Language Summary: Naturally occurring changes in the tropical Pacific Ocean, for example, the El Niño Southern Oscillation or ENSO, are known to affect weather and climate all across the planet. The influence of ENSO on Europe and North America is relatively well known but if and how ENSO affects Arctic weather and climate is less clear. In this study, we identify a correlation between ENSO and winter temperatures in the Arctic focusing specifically on the Barents and Kara Seas. We then examine a large collection of climate model experiments to see if they reproduce the observed correlation. We find that models, on average, do not. However, a small selection of the model experiments do show a correlation as large or larger than observed. The experiments that do reproduce the observed correlation are those that, by chance, have sea ice variations similar to observed; or are experiments in which sea ice is constrained to perfectly match observations. We conclude that Barents and Kara Sea winter temperature variations are primarily governed by local sea ice changes, which by coincidence, may on occasion correlate with ENSO. Key Points: Observed near‐surface air temperature variations over the Barents‐Kara Sea (BKS) are correlated with El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO)Models can reproduce the ENSO‐BKS correlation, but only in realizations that have similar or identical sea ice variations as observedSea ice variations are the proximal cause of ENSO‐correlated BKS temperature changes and may be a manifestation of internal variability [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent studies have used satellite data to estimate the response of top‐of‐atmosphere (TOA) radiative fluxes to surface temperature changes in the Arctic. The satellite‐observed radiative response is indicative of Arctic climate sensitivity that determines future Arctic warming. However, it remains ambiguous whether the satellite‐observed radiative response is invariable because the time period covered by satellite data reflects a rapidly changing transient Arctic climate state with considerable sea ice loss. Using NASA's Clouds and Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) observations from 2000 to 2018, this study evaluates the invariability of the radiative response by comparing the radiative response of the high sea ice concentration (SIC) period to that of the low SIC period. The results show that the net radiative response remains approximately unchanged regardless of the SIC (−0.19 ± 0.44 and 0.15 ± 0.16 W m−2 K−1 for high and low SIC periods, respectively). In addition, seven of the 11 models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) demonstrated that the modeled radiative responses are stable. The ERA‐interim reanalysis estimates show that regionally confined changes in individual radiative feedbacks such as albedo, lapse rate, water vapor, and clouds do not vary considerably. Consequently, we infer that the radiative response in the Arctic may remain stable even under rapid Arctic climate change. Hence, the Arctic climate sensitivity can be quantified with present satellite observations. Key Points: Satellite‐observed radiative response to surface air temperature change remains unchanged under sea ice retreat over the Arctic regionRegionally confined changes in individual radiative feedbacks cannot considerably change the radiative response in the ArcticThe majority of the climate models demonstrated that the Arctic radiative response is insensitive to sea ice loss in the near future [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]