Find in Library

<p>Palaeoclimate simulations improve our understanding of the climate, inform us about the performance of climate models in a different climate scenario, and help to identify robust features of the climate system. Here, we analyse Arctic warming in an ensemble of 16 simulations of the mid-Pliocene Warm Period (mPWP), derived from the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project Phase 2 (PlioMIP2).</p> <p>The PlioMIP2 ensemble simulates Arctic (60–90<span class="inline-formula">^∘</span>&thinsp;N) annual mean surface air temperature (SAT) increases of 3.7 to 11.6&thinsp;<span class="inline-formula">^∘</span>C compared to the pre-industrial period, with a multi-model mean (MMM) increase of 7.2&thinsp;<span class="inline-formula">^∘</span>C. The Arctic warming amplification ratio relative to global SAT anomalies in the ensemble ranges from 1.8 to 3.1 (MMM is 2.3). Sea ice extent anomalies range from <span class="inline-formula">−3.0</span> to <span class="inline-formula"><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M5" display="inline" overflow="scroll" dspmath="mathml"><mrow><mo>-</mo><mn mathvariant="normal">10.4</mn><mo>×</mo><msup><mn mathvariant="normal">10</mn><mn mathvariant="normal">6</mn></msup></mrow></math><span><svg:svg xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="59pt" height="14pt" class="svg-formula" dspmath="mathimg" md5hash="54b7ed55f271963dee101ef6cd84cdcb"><svg:image xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="cp-16-2325-2020-ie00001.svg" width="59pt" height="14pt" src="cp-16-2325-2020-ie00001.png"/></svg:svg></span></span>&thinsp;km<span class="inline-formula">²</span>, with a MMM anomaly of <span class="inline-formula"><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M7" display="inline" overflow="scroll" dspmath="mathml"><mrow><mo>-</mo><mn mathvariant="normal">5.6</mn><mo>×</mo><msup><mn mathvariant="normal">10</mn><mn mathvariant="normal">6</mn></msup></mrow></math><span><svg:svg xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="53pt" height="14pt" class="svg-formula" dspmath="mathimg" md5hash="065f8a2f34bd16a1e40c7a0482fac525"><svg:image xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="cp-16-2325-2020-ie00002.svg" width="53pt" height="14pt" src="cp-16-2325-2020-ie00002.png"/></svg:svg></span></span>&thinsp;km<span class="inline-formula">²</span>, which constitutes a decrease of 53&thinsp;% compared to the pre-industrial period. The majority (11 out of 16) of models simulate summer sea-ice-free conditions (<span class="inline-formula"><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M9" display="inline" overflow="scroll" dspmath="mathml"><mrow><mo>≤</mo><mn mathvariant="normal">1</mn><mo>×</mo><msup><mn mathvariant="normal">10</mn><mn mathvariant="normal">6</mn></msup></mrow></math><span><svg:svg xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="46pt" height="14pt" class="svg-formula" dspmath="mathimg" md5hash="d2f804520c2f3e6251821c201929d424"><svg:image xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="cp-16-2325-2020-ie00003.svg" width="46pt" height="14pt" src="cp-16-2325-2020-ie00003.png"/></svg:svg></span></span>&thinsp;km<span class="inline-formula">²)</span> in their mPWP simulation. The ensemble tends to underestimate SAT in the Arctic when compared to available reconstructions, although the degree of underestimation varies strongly between the simulations. The simulations with the highest Arctic SAT anomalies tend to match the proxy dataset in its current form better. The ensemble shows some agreement with reconstructions of sea ice, particularly with regard to seasonal sea ice. Large uncertainties limit the confidence that can be placed in the findings and the compatibility of the different proxy datasets. We show that while reducing uncertainties in the reconstructions could decrease the SAT data–model discord substantially, further improvements are likely to be found in enhanced boundary conditions or model physics. Lastly, we compare the Arctic warming in the mPWP to projections of future Arctic warming and find that the PlioMIP2 ensemble simulates greater Arctic amplification than CMIP5 future climate simulations and an increase instead of a decrease in Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) strength compared to pre-industrial period. The results highlight the importance of slow feedbacks in equilibrium climate simulations, and that caution must be taken when using simulations of the mPWP as an analogue for future climate change.</p>