Search

The implementation of boundary conditions is a key aspect of climate simulations. We describe here how the Climate Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) forcing data sets have been processed and implemented in Version 6 of the Institut Pierre‐Simon Laplace (IPSL) climate model (IPSL‐CM6A‐LR) as used for CMIP6. Details peculiar to some of the Model Intercomparison Projects are also described. IPSL‐CM6A‐LR is run without interactive chemistry; thus, tropospheric and stratospheric aerosols as well as ozone have to be prescribed. We improved the aerosol interpolation procedure and highlight a new methodology to adjust the ozone vertical profile in a way that is consistent with the model dynamical state at the time step level. The corresponding instantaneous and effective radiative forcings have been estimated and are being presented where possible. Plain Language Summary: Climate Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 is an international project to compare the results from climate model simulations performed according to a common protocol. Such simulations require boundary conditions (called "climate forcings"), which are fed to the models in order to represent, for example, long‐lived greenhouse gases, ozone, atmospheric aerosols, or land surface properties. The same forcing data sets are used by the different modeling groups who carry out the Climate Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 simulations; however, their implementation may differ as it depends on the model structure. This article gives details of how these forcing data were implemented in the IPSL‐CM6A‐LR model. Some of the forcing data are common to all types all simulations, whereas others depend on the runs considered. Radiative forcings, as estimated in the model, are presented for some of the forcing mechanisms. Key Points: We present how the CMIP6 forcing data were implemented in the IPSL‐CM6A‐LR climate model for the realization of the CMIP6 set of climate simulationsAn improved conservative interpolation procedure for emissions is detailed and illustrated to compute tropospheric aerosolsWe present a new methodology to adjust the prescribed ozone vertical profile to match the model atmospheric dynamical state around the tropopause [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spatial patterns and temporal trends of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) deposition are important for quantifying their impact on forest carbon (C) uptake. In a first step, we modeled historical and future change in the global distributions of the atmospheric deposition of N and P from the dry and wet deposition of aerosols and gases containing N and P. Future projections were compared between two scenarios with contrasting aerosol emissions. Modeled fields of N and P deposition and P concentration were evaluated using globally distributed in situ measurements. N deposition peaked around 1990 in European forests and around 2010 in East Asian forests, and both increased sevenfold relative to 1850. P deposition peaked around 2010 in South Asian forests and increased 3.5-fold relative to 1850. In a second step, we estimated the change in C storage in forests due to the fertilization by deposited N and P (∆Cν dep), based on the retention of deposited nutrients, their allocation within plants, and C:N and C:P stoichiometry. ∆Cν dep for 1997-2013 was estimated to be 0.27 ± 0.13 Pg C year−1 from N and 0.054 ± 0.10 Pg C year−1 from P, contributing 9% and 2% of the terrestrial C sink, respectively. Sensitivity tests show that uncertainty of ∆Cν dep was larger from P than from N, mainly due to uncertainty in the fraction of deposited P that is fixed by soil. ∆ CP dep was exceeded by ∆ CN dep over 1960-2007 in a large area of East Asian and West European forests due to a faster growth in N deposition than P. Our results suggest a significant contribution of anthropogenic P deposition to C storage, and additional sources of N are needed to support C storage by P in some Asian tropical forests where the deposition rate increased even faster for P than for N. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[1] Recent analyses of ice core methane concentrations suggested that methane emissions from wetlands were the primary driver for prehistoric changes in atmospheric methane. However, these interpretations conflict as to the location of wetlands, magnitude of emissions, and the environmental controls on methane oxidation. The flux of other reactive trace gases to the atmosphere also controls apparent atmospheric methane concentrations because these compounds compete for the hydroxyl radical (OH), which is the primary atmospheric sink for methane. In a series of linked biosphere-atmosphere chemistry-climate modeling experiments, we simulate the methane and biogenic volatile organic compound emissions from the terrestrial biosphere from the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) to the present. Using a state-of-the-art chemistry-climate model, we simulate the atmospheric concentrations of methane, OH, and other reactive trace gas species. Over the past 21,000 years, methane emissions from wetlands increased slightly to the end of the Pleistocene but then decreased again, reaching levels at the preindustrial Holocene that were similar to the LGM. Global wetland area decreased by 14% from LGM to the preindustrial time. Emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs), however, nearly doubled over the same period of time. Atmospheric OH burdens and methane concentrations were affected by this major change in BVOC emissions, with methane lifetimes increasing by more than 2 years from LGM to the present. We simulate a change in methane concentration of ∼385 ppb, accounting for 88% of the ∼440 ppb increase in methane concentrations observed in ice cores. Thus glacial-interglacial changes in atmospheric methane concentrations would have been modulated by BVOC emissions. In addition, the increase in atmospheric methane concentrations since the mid-Holocene is partly caused in our results by the increases in anthropogenic methane emissions over this period. While the interplay between BVOC and wetland methane emissions since the LGM cannot explain the entire record of ice core methane concentrations, consideration of BVOC source dynamics is central to understanding ice core methane. Rapid changes in atmospheric methane concentrations, also observed in ice cores, require further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]