Abstract
Anthropogenic climate forcing will cause the global mean sea level to rise over the 21st century. However, regional sea level is expected to vary across ocean basins, superimposed by the influence of natural internal climate variability. Here, we address the detection of dynamic sea level (DSL) changes by combining the perspectives of a single and a multimodel ensemble approach (the 50-member CanESM5 and a 27-model ensemble, respectively, all retrieved from the CMIP6 archive), under three CMIP6 projected scenarios: SSP1-2.6, SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5. The ensemble analysis takes into account four key metrics: signal (S), noise (N), S/N ratio, and time of emergence (ToE). The results from both sets of ensembles agree in the fact that regions with higher S/N (associated with smaller uncertainties) also reflect earlier ToEs. The DSL signal is projected to emerge in the Southern Ocean, Southeast Pacific, Northwest Atlantic, and the Arctic. Results common for both sets of ensemble simulations show that while S progressively increases with increased projected emissions, N, in turn, does not vary substantially among the SSPs, suggesting that uncertainty arising from internal climate variability has little dependence on changes in the magnitude of external forcing. Projected changes are greater and quite similar for the scenarios SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5 and considerably smaller for the SSP1-2.6, highlighting the importance of public policies towards lower emission scenarios and of keeping emissions below a certain threshold.
摘要
人为气候强迫会引起21世纪全球平均海平面的升高。相对于全球平均海平面,区域海平面的变化将在气候内部变率的作用下,表现出海盆尺度上的空间差异。本文基于CMIP6中CanESM5模式的50个样本集合和27个不同模式集合,研究了SSP1-2.6,SSP3-7.0和SSP5-8.5三种未来预测情景下海面动力高度的变化。分析过程中重点关注了信号(S,线性趋势)、噪音(N,不确定性)、信噪比(S/N)和显变时间(ToE,气候变化引起的海平面变化明显超出其自然变率范围的时间)等四种指标。两种集合均表明,具有较高信噪比的海域(对应于较小的模拟不确定性),海平面高度的显变时间也更早;海面动力高度的变化将主要发生在南大洋、东南太平洋、西北大西洋和北冰洋。两种集合也表明,海面动力高度的变化会随着排放强度的增加而增大,但排放强度对噪音的影响不显著,这也表明气候内部变率引起的不确定性受外部强迫的影响较小。海平面在SSP3-7.0和SSP5-8.5两种情景下预测的变化较大且相近,在SSP1-2.6情景下变化较小,这表明采取公共政策以维持低排放且不超过特定阈值的重要性。
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bilbao, R. A. F., J. M. Gregory, and N. Bouttes, 2015: Analysis of the regional pattern of sea level change due to ocean dynamics and density change for 1993-2099 in observations and CMIP5 AOGCMs. Climate Dyn., 45, 2647–2666, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2499-z.
Bordbar, M. H., T. Martin, M. Latif, and W. Park, 2015: Effects of long-term variability on projections of twenty-first century dynamic sea level. Nature Climate Change, 5, 343–347, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2569.
Bouttes, N., and J. M. Gregory, 2014: Attribution of the spatial pattern of CO2-forced sea level change to ocean surface flux changes. Environmental Research Letters, 9, 034004, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/3/034004.
Carson, M., A. Köhl, and D. Stammer, 2015: The impact of regional multidecadal and century-scale internal climate variability on sea level trends in CMIP5 models. J. Climate, 28, 853–861, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00359.1.
Carson, M., A. Köhl, D. Stammer, A. B. A. Slangen, C. A. Katsman, R. S. W. van de Wal, J. Church, and N. White, 2016: Coastal sea level changes, observed and projected during the 20th and 21st century. Climatic Change, 134, 269–281, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1520-1.
Carson, M., K. Lyu, K. Richter, M. Becker, C. M. Domingues, W. Q. Han, and L. Zanna, 2019: Climate model uncertainty and trend detection in regional sea level projections: A review. Surveys in Geophysics, 40, 1631–1653, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-019-09559-3.
Cazenave, A., and F. Remy, 2011: Sea level and climate: Measurements and causes of changes. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2, 647–662, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.139.
Church, J. A., and Coauthors, 2013: Sea level change. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, T. F. Stocker et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CB09781107415315.026
Clark, P. U., J. A. Church, J. M. Gregory, and A. J. Payne, 2015: Recent progress in understanding and projecting regional and global mean sea level change. Current Climate Change Reports, 1, 224–246, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-015-0024-4.
Deser, C., and Coauthors, 2020: Insights from Earth system model initial-condition large ensembles and future prospects. Nature Climate Change, 10, 277–286, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0731-2.
Eyring, V., S. Bony, G. A. Meehl, C. A. Senior, B. Stevens, R. J. Stouffer, and K. E. Taylor, 2016: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization. Geoscientific Model Development, 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016.
Forget, G., and R. M. Ponte, 2015: The partition of regional sea level variability. Progress in Oceanography, 137, 173–195, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2015.06.002.
Gregory, J. M., and Coauthors, 2013: Twentieth-century globalmean sea level rise: Is the whole greater than the sum of the parts? J. Climate, 26, 4476–4499, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00319.1.
Gregory, J. M., and Coauthors, 2019: Concepts and terminology for sea level: Mean, variability and change, both local and global. Surveys in Geophysics, 40, 1251–1289, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-019-09525-z.
Griffies, S. M., and R. J. Greatbatch, 2012: Physical processes that impact the evolution of global mean sea level in ocean climate models. Ocean Modelling, 51, 37–72, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2012.04.003.
Gupta, A. S., N. C. Jourdain, J. N. Brown, and D. Monselesan, 2013: Climate drift in the CMIP5 models. J. Climate, 26, 8597–8615, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00521.1.
Hajima, T., and Coauthors, 2019: Description of the MIROCES2L Earth system model and evaluation of its climatebiogeochemical processes and feedbacks. Geoscientific Model Development Discussions, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-275.
Hu, A. X., and C. Deser, 2013: Uncertainty in future regional sea level rise due to internal climate variability. Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 2768–2772, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50531.
Hu, A. X., and S. C. Bates, 2018: Internal climate variability and projected future regional steric and dynamic sea level rise. Nature Communications, 9, 1068, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03474-8.
Hyder, P., and Coauthors, 2018: Critical Southern Ocean climate model biases traced to atmospheric model cloud errors. Nature Communications, 9, 3625, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05634-2.
Kelley, M., and Coauthors, 2020: GISS-E2.1: Configurations and climatology. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, e2019MS002025, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002025.
Kiss, A. E., and Coauthors, 2020: ACCESS-OM2 v1.0: A global ocean-sea ice model at three resolutions. Geoscientific Model Development, 13, 401–442, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-401-2020.
Landerer, F. W., P. J. Gleckler, and T. Lee, 2014: Evaluation of CMIP5 dynamic sea surface height multi-model simulations against satellite observations. Climate Dyn., 43, 1271–1283, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1939-x.
Lauritzen, P. H., and Coauthors, 2018: NCAR release of CAMSE in CESM2.0: A reformulation of the spectral element dynamical core in dry-mass vertical coordinates with comprehensive treatment of condensates and energy. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 10, 1537–1570, https://doi.org/10.1029/2017MS001257.
Lehner, F., C. Deser, N. Maher, J. Marotzke, E. Fischer, L. Brunner, R. Knutti, and E. Hawkins, 2020: Partitioning climate projection uncertainty with multiple Large Ensembles and CMIP5/6. Earth System Dynamics Discussions, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2019-93.
Li, L. J., and Coauthors, 2020: The flexible global ocean-atmosphere- land system model grid-point version 3 (FGOALSg3): Description and evaluation. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, e2019MS002012, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002012.
Little, C. M., R. M. Horton, R. E. Kopp, M. Oppenheimer, and S. Yip, 2015: Uncertainty in twenty-first-century CMIP5 sea level projections. J. Climate, 28, 838–852, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00453.1.
Liu, H. L., and Coauthors, 2018: Development and validation of the whole atmosphere community climate model with thermosphere and ionosphere extension (WACCM-X 2.0). Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 10, 381–402, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001232.
Lurton, T., and Coauthors, 2020: Implementation of the CMIP6 forcing data in the IPSL-CM6A-LR model. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12, e2019MS001940, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001940.
Lyu, K., X. B. Zhang, J. A. Church, A. B. A. Slangen, and J. Y. Hu, 2014: Time of emergence for regional sea-level change. Nature Climate Change, 4, 4006–1010, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2397.
Lyu, K., X. B. Zhang, and J. A. Church, 2020: Regional dynamic sea level simulated in the CMIP5 and CMIP6 models: Mean biases, future projections, and their linkages. J. Climate, 33, 6377–6398, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-1029.1.
Marcos, M., and A. Amores, 2014: Quantifying anthropogenic and natural contributions to thermosteric sea level rise. Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 2502–2507, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL059766.
Marcos, M., B. Marzeion, S. Dangendorf, A. B. A. Slangen, H. Palanisamy, and L. Fenoglio-Marc, 2017: Internal variability versus anthropogenic forcing on sea level and its components. Integrative Study of the Mean Sea level and Its Components. A. Cazenave et al., Eds., Springer, 337–356, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56490-6_15.
Mauritsen, T., and Coauthors, 2019: Developments in the MPI-M Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI-ESM1.2) and its response to increasing CO2. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 11, 998–1038, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001400.
Meijers, A. J. S., 2014: The southern ocean in the coupled model intercomparison project phase 5. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 372, 20130296, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2013.0296.
Meyssignac, B., and Coauthors, 2017: Evaluating model simulations of twentieth-century sea-level rise. Part II: Regional sea-level changes. J. Climate, 30, 8565–8593, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0112.1.
Müller, W. A., and Coauthors, 2018: A higher-resolution version of the max Planck institute earth system model (MPIESM1.2-HR). Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 10, 1383–1413, https://doi.org/10.1029/2017MS001217.
O'Neill, B. C., and Coauthors, 2016: The scenario model intercomparison project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6. Geoscientific Model Development, 9, 3461–3482, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016.
Pardaens, A. K., J. M. Gregory, and J. A. Lowe, 2011: A model study of factors influencing projected changes in regional sea level over the twenty-first century. Climate Dyn., 36, 2015–2033, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-009-0738-x.
Riahi, K., and Coauthors, 2017: The shared socioeconomic pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview. Global Environmental Change, 42, 153–168, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009.
Richter, K., R. E. M. Riva, and H. Drange, 2013: Impact of selfattraction and loading effects induced by shelf mass loading on projected regional sea level rise. Geophysical Research Letters, 40, 1144–1148, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50265.
Roberts, M. J., and Coauthors, 2019: Description of the resolution hierarchy of the global coupled HadGEM3-GC3.1 model as used in CMIP6 HighResMIP experiments. Geoscientific Model Development, 12, 4999–5028, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4999-2019.
Rong, X. Y., and Coauthors, 2018: The CAMS climate system model and a basic evaluation of its climatology and climate variability simulation. Journal of Meteorological Research, 32, 839–861, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13351-018-8058-x.
Sallée, J. B., E. Shuckburgh, N. Bruneau, A. J. S. Meijers, T. J. Bracegirdle, Z. Wang, and T. Roy, 2013: Assessment of Southern Ocean water mass circulation and characteristics in CMIP5 models: Historical bias and forcing response. J. Geophys. Res., 118, 1830–1844, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrc.20135.
Séférian, R., and Coauthors, 2019: Evaluation of CNRM earth system model, CNRM-ESM2-1: Role of earth system processes in present-day and future climate. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 11, 4182–4227, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001791.
Seland, Ø., and Coauthors, 2020: The Norwegian earth system model, NorESM2 - evaluation of the CMIP6 DECK and historical simulations. Geoscientific Model Development Discussions, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-378.
Sellar, A. A., and Coauthors, 2019: UKESM1: Description and evaluation of the U.K. Earth system model. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 11, 4513–4558, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001739.
Slangen, A. B. A., J. A. Church, X. B. Zhang, and D. Monselesan, 2014: Detection and attribution of global mean thermosteric sea level change. Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 5951–5959, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL061356.
Slangen, A. B. A., J. A. Church, X. B. Zhang, and D. P. Monselesan, 2015: The sea-level response to external forcings in historical simulations of CMIP5 climate models. J. Climate, 28, 8521–8539, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0376.1.
Slangen, A. B. A., F. Adloff, S. Jevrejeva, P. W. Leclercq, B. Marzeion, Y. Wada, and R. Winkelmann, 2017: A review of recent updates of sea-level projections at global and regional scales. Surveys in Geophysics, 38, 385–406, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-016-9374-2.
Stott, P. A., N. P. Gillett, G. C. Hegerl, D. J. Karoly, D. A. Stone, X. B. Zhang, and F. Zwiers, 2010: Detection and attribution of climate change: A regional perspective. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1, 192–211, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.34.
Swart, N. C., and Coauthors, 2019: The Canadian earth system model version 5 (CanESM5.0.3). Geoscientific Model Development Discussions, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-177.
Tatebe, H., and Coauthors, 2019: Description and basic evaluation of simulated mean state, internal variability, and climate sensitivity in MIROC6. Geoscientific Model Development, 12, 2727–2765, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2727-2019.
van Vuuren, D. P., and Coauthors, 2011: The representative concentration pathways: An overview. Climatic Change, 109, 5, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z.
Visser, H., S. Dangendorf, and A. C. Petersen, 2015: A review of trend models applied to sea-level data with reference to the “acceleration-deceleration debate”. J. Geophys. Res., 120, 3873–3895, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JC010716.
Voldoire, A., and Coauthors, 2019: Evaluation of CMIP6 DECK experiments with CNRM-CM6-1. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 11, 2177–2213, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001683.
Volodin, E., and Coauthors, 2019a. INM INM-CM4-8 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP. Version 20190603, Earth System Grid Federation, https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.1422.
Volodin, E., and Coauthors, 2019b. INM INM-CM5-0 model output prepared for CMIP6 CMIP. Version 20190619, Earth System Grid Federation, https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.1423.
Wu, T. W., and Coauthors, 2019: The Beijing climate center climate system model (BCC-CSM): The main progress from CMIP5 to CMIP6. Geoscientific Model Development, 12, 1573–1600, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1573-2019.
Wyser, K., T. van Noije, S. T. Yang, J. von Hardenberg, D. O'Donnell, and R. Döscher, 2019: On the increased climate sensitivity in the EC-Earth model from CMIP5 to CMIP6. Geoscientific Model Development Discussions, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-282.
Yin, J. J., M. E. Schlesinger, and R. J. Stouffer, 2009: Model projections of rapid sea-level rise on the northeast coast of the United States. Nature Geoscience, 2, 262–266, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo462.
Yin, J. J., S. M. Griffies, and R. J. Stouffer, 2010: Spatial variability of sea level rise in twenty-first century projections. J. Climate, 23, 4585–4607, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3533.1.
Yin, J. Y., 2012: Century to multi-century sea level rise projections from CMIP5 models. Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L17709, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052947.
Yukimoto, S., and Coauthors, 2019: The meteorological research institute Earth system model version 2.0, MRI-ESM2.0: Description and basic evaluation of the physical component. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 97, 931–965, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2019-051.
Ziehn, T., and Coauthors, 2020: The Australian earth system model: ACCESS-ESM1.5. Journal of Southern Hemisphere Earth Systems Science, https://doi.org/10.1071/ES19035.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme, which, through its Working Group on Coupled Modelling, coordinated and promoted CMIP6. We thank the climate modeling groups for producing and making available their model output, the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) for archiving the data and providing access, and the multiple funding agencies that support CMIP6 and ESGF. Grants CNPq-MCTINCT-594 CRIOSFERA 573720/2008-8 and Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior-Brasil (CAPES)-Finance Code 001; FAPESP 2015/506861; 2017/16511-5; 2018/14789-9.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Article Highlights
• DSL variability is quite similar between the CanESM5 single-model and the CMIP6 multi-model ensembles.
• DSL Noise among ensemble members does not vary across different projected scenarios, which suggests that external forcing does not impact the internal climate variability significantly.
• Noise is reduced in the single-model relative to the multi-model ensemble, since the latter accounts for model differences other than just internal variability.
• High emission scenarios (SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5) project similar and equivalent sea level changes as an adjustment to the external forcing, whereas DSL changes in the sustainable scenario (SSP1-2.6) are shown to be mostly dominated by internal variability.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ferrero, B., Tonelli, M., Marcello, F. et al. Long-term Regional Dynamic Sea Level Changes from CMIP6 Projections. Adv. Atmos. Sci. 38, 157–167 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-020-0178-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-020-0178-4