Quantifying components of aerosol‐cloud‐radiation interactions in climate models

By M. Zelinka, T. Andrews, Piers M. Forster, K. Taylor. 2014

179 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Atmospheric Science, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4936ba62a4cd21dfa27722d2b6f1b7132309a466

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Atmospheric Science

1. M. Webb
2. Bjorn Stevens
3. Sandrine Bony
4. Andrew Gettelman
5. Robert Pincus
6. Chris Bretherton
7. T. Andrews
8. Stephen A. Klein

In Global and Planetary Change

1. M. Webb
2. Bjorn Stevens
3. Sandrine Bony
4. Andrew Gettelman
5. Robert Pincus
6. T. Andrews
7. Stephen A. Klein
8. Chris Bretherton

Citations in the corpus

• The Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project (CFMIP) contribution to CMIP6. (2016, background): “COSP has also enabled studies attributing cloud feedbacks and cloud adjustments to different cloud types (e.g. Zelinka et al., 2013; Zelinka et al., 2014; Tsushima et al., 2015).”
• Causes of climate change over the historical record (2019, background): “…however, difficult to quantify as the natural aerosol loading due to biomass burning and natural sources is uncertain, as is the magnitude of aerosolcloud interactions and therefore the realistic nature of their representation in models (e.g. Zelinka et al 2014, Wilcox et al 2015, Toll et al 2017).”
• Constraining the aerosol influence on cloud liquid water path (2018, background): “Estimates of radiative forcing due to changes in cloud properties vary significantly between different global climate models (Zelinka et al., 2014; Heyn et al., 2017), highlighting the need for observational constraints on the impact of aerosol on cloud properties.”
• Recommendations for diagnosing effective radiative forcing from climate models for CMIP6 (2016, background): “Tropospheric rapid cloud adjustments are the likely cause of differences for 10xBC and 5xSul, in particular the semidirect effect for 10xBC and aerosol-cloud interaction for 5xSul [Zelinka et al., 2014].”
• Improved Aerosol Processes and Effective Radiative Forcing in HadGEM3 and UKESM1 (2018, background): “The degree of uncertainty in the aerosol ERF is dependent on uncertainties not only in the aerosol processes themselves but also in the underlying physical model processes (Regayre et al., 2018; Zelinka et al., 2014).”
• The Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (RFMIP): Experimental Protocol for CMIP6 (in open review: 10.5194/gmd-2016-88) (2016, methodology): “These will be used to estimate rapid adjustments by clouds using radiative kernels (Zelinka et al., 2012, 2014) that map changes in cloud properties into top-of-atmosphere radiative flux perturbations.”
• Bounding Global Aerosol Radiative Forcing of Climate Change (2020, methodology): “…is then multiplied by 0.9 to account for an offsetting contribution of 10% coming1259 from the terrestrial spectrum, as calculated by GCMs (Zelinka et al., 2014; Heyn1260 et al., 2017);1261 • 0.21 to 0.29 for cL, based on satellite retrievals of cloud properties and planetary1262…”