General circulation model

Last updated

Climate models are systems of differential equations based on the basic laws of physics, fluid motion, and chemistry. To "run" a model, scientists divide the planet into a 3-dimensional grid, apply the basic equations, and evaluate the results. Atmospheric models calculate winds, heat transfer, radiation, relative humidity, and surface hydrology within each grid and evaluate interactions with neighboring points. AtmosphericModelSchematic.png
Climate models are systems of differential equations based on the basic laws of physics, fluid motion, and chemistry. To "run" a model, scientists divide the planet into a 3-dimensional grid, apply the basic equations, and evaluate the results. Atmospheric models calculate winds, heat transfer, radiation, relative humidity, and surface hydrology within each grid and evaluate interactions with neighboring points.
This visualization shows early test renderings of a global computational model of Earth's atmosphere based on data from NASA's Goddard Earth Observing System Model, Version 5 (GEOS-5).

A general circulation model (GCM) is a type of climate model. It employs a mathematical model of the general circulation of a planetary atmosphere or ocean. It uses the Navier–Stokes equations on a rotating sphere with thermodynamic terms for various energy sources (radiation, latent heat). These equations are the basis for computer programs used to simulate the Earth's atmosphere or oceans. Atmospheric and oceanic GCMs (AGCM and OGCM) are key components along with sea ice and land-surface components.


GCMs and global climate models are used for weather forecasting, understanding the climate, and forecasting climate change.

Versions designed for decade to century time scale climate applications were originally created by Syukuro Manabe and Kirk Bryan at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) in Princeton, New Jersey. [1] These models are based on the integration of a variety of fluid dynamical, chemical and sometimes biological equations.


The acronym GCM originally stood for General Circulation Model. Recently, a second meaning came into use, namely Global Climate Model. While these do not refer to the same thing, General Circulation Models are typically the tools used for modelling climate, and hence the two terms are sometimes used interchangeably. However, the term "global climate model" is ambiguous and may refer to an integrated framework that incorporates multiple components including a general circulation model, or may refer to the general class of climate models that use a variety of means to represent the climate mathematically.


In 1956, Norman Phillips developed a mathematical model that could realistically depict monthly and seasonal patterns in the troposphere. It became the first successful climate model. [2] [3] Following Phillips's work, several groups began working to create GCMs. [4] The first to combine both oceanic and atmospheric processes was developed in the late 1960s at the NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory. [1] By the early 1980s, the United States' National Center for Atmospheric Research had developed the Community Atmosphere Model; this model has been continuously refined. [5] In 1996, efforts began to model soil and vegetation types. [6] Later the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research's HadCM3 model coupled ocean-atmosphere elements. [4] The role of gravity waves was added in the mid-1980s. Gravity waves are required to simulate regional and global scale circulations accurately. [7]

Atmospheric and oceanic models

Atmospheric (AGCMs) and oceanic GCMs (OGCMs) can be coupled to form an atmosphere-ocean coupled general circulation model (CGCM or AOGCM). With the addition of submodels such as a sea ice model or a model for evapotranspiration over land, AOGCMs become the basis for a full climate model. [8]


Three-dimensional (more properly four-dimensional) GCMs apply discrete equations for fluid motion and integrate these forward in time. They contain parameterisations for processes such as convection that occur on scales too small to be resolved directly.

A simple general circulation model (SGCM) consists of a dynamic core that relates properties such as temperature to others such as pressure and velocity. Examples are programs that solve the primitive equations, given energy input and energy dissipation in the form of scale-dependent friction, so that atmospheric waves with the highest wavenumbers are most attenuated. Such models may be used to study atmospheric processes, but are not suitable for climate projections.

Atmospheric GCMs (AGCMs) model the atmosphere (and typically contain a land-surface model as well) using imposed sea surface temperatures (SSTs). [9] They may include atmospheric chemistry.

AGCMs consist of a dynamical core which integrates the equations of fluid motion, typically for:

A GCM contains prognostic equations that are a function of time (typically winds, temperature, moisture, and surface pressure) together with diagnostic equations that are evaluated from them for a specific time period. As an example, pressure at any height can be diagnosed by applying the hydrostatic equation to the predicted surface pressure and the predicted values of temperature between the surface and the height of interest. Pressure is used to compute the pressure gradient force in the time-dependent equation for the winds.

OGCMs model the ocean (with fluxes from the atmosphere imposed) and may contain a sea ice model. For example, the standard resolution of HadOM3 is 1.25 degrees in latitude and longitude, with 20 vertical levels, leading to approximately 1,500,000 variables.

AOGCMs (e.g. HadCM3, GFDL CM2.X) combine the two submodels. They remove the need to specify fluxes across the interface of the ocean surface. These models are the basis for model predictions of future climate, such as are discussed by the IPCC. AOGCMs internalise as many processes as possible. They have been used to provide predictions at a regional scale. While the simpler models are generally susceptible to analysis and their results are easier to understand, AOGCMs may be nearly as hard to analyse as the climate itself.


The fluid equations for AGCMs are made discrete using either the finite difference method or the spectral method. For finite differences, a grid is imposed on the atmosphere. The simplest grid uses constant angular grid spacing (i.e., a latitude / longitude grid). However, non-rectangular grids (e.g., icosahedral) and grids of variable resolution [10] are more often used. [11] The LMDz model can be arranged to give high resolution over any given section of the planet. HadGEM1 (and other ocean models) use an ocean grid with higher resolution in the tropics to help resolve processes believed to be important for the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO). Spectral models generally use a gaussian grid, because of the mathematics of transformation between spectral and grid-point space. Typical AGCM resolutions are between 1 and 5 degrees in latitude or longitude: HadCM3, for example, uses 3.75 in longitude and 2.5 degrees in latitude, giving a grid of 96 by 73 points (96 x 72 for some variables); and has 19 vertical levels. This results in approximately 500,000 "basic" variables, since each grid point has four variables (u,v, T, Q), though a full count would give more (clouds; soil levels). HadGEM1 uses a grid of 1.875 degrees in longitude and 1.25 in latitude in the atmosphere; HiGEM, a high-resolution variant, uses 1.25 x 0.83 degrees respectively. [12] These resolutions are lower than is typically used for weather forecasting. [13] Ocean resolutions tend to be higher, for example HadCM3 has 6 ocean grid points per atmospheric grid point in the horizontal.

For a standard finite difference model, uniform gridlines converge towards the poles. This would lead to computational instabilities (see CFL condition) and so the model variables must be filtered along lines of latitude close to the poles. Ocean models suffer from this problem too, unless a rotated grid is used in which the North Pole is shifted onto a nearby landmass. Spectral models do not suffer from this problem. Some experiments use geodesic grids [14] and icosahedral grids, which (being more uniform) do not have pole-problems. Another approach to solving the grid spacing problem is to deform a Cartesian cube such that it covers the surface of a sphere. [15]

Flux buffering

Some early versions of AOGCMs required an ad hoc process of "flux correction" to achieve a stable climate. This resulted from separately prepared ocean and atmospheric models that each used an implicit flux from the other component different than that component could produce. Such a model failed to match observations. However, if the fluxes were 'corrected', the factors that led to these unrealistic fluxes might be unrecognised, which could affect model sensitivity. As a result, the vast majority of models used in the current round of IPCC reports do not use them. The model improvements that now make flux corrections unnecessary include improved ocean physics, improved resolution in both atmosphere and ocean, and more physically consistent coupling between atmosphere and ocean submodels. Improved models now maintain stable, multi-century simulations of surface climate that are considered to be of sufficient quality to allow their use for climate projections. [16]


Moist convection releases latent heat and is important to the Earth's energy budget. Convection occurs on too small a scale to be resolved by climate models, and hence it must be handled via parameters. This has been done since the 1950s. Akio Arakawa did much of the early work, and variants of his scheme are still used, [17] although a variety of different schemes are now in use. [18] [19] [20] Clouds are also typically handled with a parameter, for a similar lack of scale. Limited understanding of clouds has limited the success of this strategy, but not due to some inherent shortcoming of the method. [21]


Most models include software to diagnose a wide range of variables for comparison with observations or study of atmospheric processes. An example is the 2-metre temperature, which is the standard height for near-surface observations of air temperature. This temperature is not directly predicted from the model but is deduced from surface and lowest-model-layer temperatures. Other software is used for creating plots and animations.


Projected annual mean surface air temperature from 1970-2100, based on SRES emissions scenario A1B, using the NOAA GFDL CM2.1 climate model (credit: NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory). [22]

Coupled AOGCMs use transient climate simulations to project/predict climate changes under various scenarios. These can be idealised scenarios (most commonly, CO2 emissions increasing at 1%/yr) or based on recent history (usually the "IS92a" or more recently the SRES scenarios). Which scenarios are most realistic remains uncertain.

The 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report F igure 9.3 shows the global mean response of 19 different coupled models to an idealised experiment in which emissions increased at 1% per year. [23] Figure 9.5 shows the response of a smaller number of models to more recent trends. For the 7 climate models shown there, the temperature change to 2100 varies from 2 to 4.5 °C with a median of about 3 °C.

Future scenarios do not include unknown events  for example, volcanic eruptions or changes in solar forcing. These effects are believed to be small in comparison to greenhouse gas (GHG) forcing in the long term, but large volcanic eruptions, for example, can exert a substantial temporary cooling effect.

Human GHG emissions are a model input, although it is possible to include an economic/technological submodel to provide these as well. Atmospheric GHG levels are usually supplied as an input, though it is possible to include a carbon cycle model that reflects vegetation and oceanic processes to calculate such levels.

Emissions scenarios

Projected change in annual mean surface air temperature from the late 20th century to the middle 21st century, based on SRES emissions scenario A1B (credit: NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory). Projected change in annual mean surface air temperature from the late 20th century to the middle 21st century, based on SRES emissions scenario A1B.png
Projected change in annual mean surface air temperature from the late 20th century to the middle 21st century, based on SRES emissions scenario A1B (credit: NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory).

For the six SRES marker scenarios, IPCC (2007:7–8) gave a "best estimate" of global mean temperature increase (2090–2099 relative to the period 1980–1999) of 1.8 °C to 4.0 °C. [24] Over the same time period, the "likely" range (greater than 66% probability, based on expert judgement) for these scenarios was for a global mean temperature increase of 1.1 to 6.4 °C. [24]

In 2008 a study made climate projections using several emission scenarios. [25] In a scenario where global emissions start to decrease by 2010 and then declined at a sustained rate of 3% per year, the likely global average temperature increase was predicted to be 1.7 °C above pre-industrial levels by 2050, rising to around 2 °C by 2100. In a projection designed to simulate a future where no efforts are made to reduce global emissions, the likely rise in global average temperature was predicted to be 5.5 °C by 2100. A rise as high as 7 °C was thought possible, although less likely.

Another no-reduction scenario resulted in a median warming over land (2090–99 relative to the period 1980–99) of 5.1 °C. Under the same emissions scenario but with a different model, the predicted median warming was 4.1 °C. [26]

Model accuracy

SST errors in HadCM3 Hadcm3-era-sst-annual.png
SST errors in HadCM3
North American precipitation from various models Climate model NA annual precipitation 2002.jpg
North American precipitation from various models
Temperature predictions from some climate models assuming the SRES A2 emissions scenario Global Warming Predictions.png
Temperature predictions from some climate models assuming the SRES A2 emissions scenario

AOGCMs internalise as many processes as are sufficiently understood. However, they are still under development and significant uncertainties remain. They may be coupled to models of other processes in Earth system models, such as the carbon cycle, so as to better model feedbacks. Most recent simulations show "plausible" agreement with the measured temperature anomalies over the past 150 years, when driven by observed changes in greenhouse gases and aerosols. Agreement improves by including both natural and anthropogenic forcings. [27] [28] [29]

Imperfect models may nevertheless produce useful results. GCMs are capable of reproducing the general features of the observed global temperature over the past century. [27]

A debate over how to reconcile climate model predictions that upper air (tropospheric) warming should be greater than observed surface warming, some of which appeared to show otherwise, [30] was resolved in favour of the models, following data revisions.

Cloud effects are a significant area of uncertainty in climate models. Clouds have competing effects on climate. They cool the surface by reflecting sunlight into space; they warm it by increasing the amount of infrared radiation transmitted from the atmosphere to the surface. [31] In the 2001 IPCC report possible changes in cloud cover were highlighted as a major uncertainty in predicting climate. [32] [33]

Climate researchers around the world use climate models to understand the climate system. Thousands of papers have been published about model-based studies. Part of this research is to improve the models.

In 2000, a comparison between measurements and dozens of GCM simulations of ENSO-driven tropical precipitation, water vapor, temperature, and outgoing longwave radiation found similarity between measurements and simulation of most factors. However the simulated change in precipitation was about one-fourth less than what was observed. Errors in simulated precipitation imply errors in other processes, such as errors in the evaporation rate that provides moisture to create precipitation. The other possibility is that the satellite-based measurements are in error. Either indicates progress is required in order to monitor and predict such changes. [34]

The precise magnitude of future changes in climate is still uncertain; [35] for the end of the 21st century (2071 to 2100), for SRES scenario A2, the change of global average SAT change from AOGCMs compared with 1961 to 1990 is +3.0 °C (5.4 °F) and the range is +1.3 to +4.5 °C (+2.3 to 8.1 °F).

The IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report asserted "very high confidence that models reproduce the general features of the global-scale annual mean surface temperature increase over the historical period". However, the report also observed that the rate of warming over the period 1998–2012 was lower than that predicted by 111 out of 114 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project climate models. [36]

Relation to weather forecasting

The global climate models used for climate projections are similar in structure to (and often share computer code with) numerical models for weather prediction, but are nonetheless logically distinct.

Most weather forecasting is done on the basis of interpreting numerical model results. Since forecasts are short  typically a few days or a week  such models do not usually contain an ocean model but rely on imposed SSTs. They also require accurate initial conditions to begin the forecast  typically these are taken from the output of a previous forecast, blended with observations. Predictions must require only a few hours; but because they only cover a one-week the models can be run at higher resolution than in climate mode. Currently the ECMWF runs at 9 km (5.6 mi) resolution [37] as opposed to the 100-to-200 km (62-to-124 mi) scale used by typical climate model runs. Often local models are run using global model results for boundary conditions, to achieve higher local resolution: for example, the Met Office runs a mesoscale model with an 11 km (6.8 mi) resolution [38] covering the UK, and various agencies in the US employ models such as the NGM and NAM models. Like most global numerical weather prediction models such as the GFS, global climate models are often spectral models [39] instead of grid models. Spectral models are often used for global models because some computations in modeling can be performed faster, thus reducing run times.


Climate models use quantitative methods to simulate the interactions of the atmosphere, oceans, land surface and ice.

All climate models take account of incoming energy as short wave electromagnetic radiation, chiefly visible and short-wave (near) infrared, as well as outgoing energy as long wave (far) infrared electromagnetic radiation from the earth. Any imbalance results in a change in temperature.

The most talked-about models of recent years relate temperature to emissions of greenhouse gases. These models project an upward trend in the surface temperature record, as well as a more rapid increase in temperature at higher altitudes. [40]

Three (or more properly, four since time is also considered) dimensional GCM's discretise the equations for fluid motion and energy transfer and integrate these over time. They also contain parametrisations for processes such as convection that occur on scales too small to be resolved directly.

Atmospheric GCMs (AGCMs) model the atmosphere and impose sea surface temperatures as boundary conditions. Coupled atmosphere-ocean GCMs (AOGCMs, e.g. HadCM3, EdGCM, GFDL CM2.X, ARPEGE-Climat [41] ) combine the two models.

Models range in complexity:

Other submodels can be interlinked, such as land use, allowing researchers to predict the interaction between climate and ecosystems.

Comparison with other climate models

Earth-system models of intermediate complexity (EMICs)

The Climber-3 model uses a 2.5-dimensional statistical-dynamical model with 7.5° × 22.5° resolution and time step of 1/2 a day. An oceanic submodel is MOM-3 (Modular Ocean Model) with a 3.75° × 3.75° grid and 24 vertical levels. [42]

Radiative-convective models (RCM)

One-dimensional, radiative-convective models were used to verify basic climate assumptions in the 1980s and 1990s. [43]

Earth system models

GCMs can form part of Earth system models, e.g. by coupling ice sheet models for the dynamics of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, and one or more chemical transport models (CTMs) for species important to climate. Thus a carbon chemistry transport model may allow a GCM to better predict anthropogenic changes in carbon dioxide concentrations. In addition, this approach allows accounting for inter-system feedback: e.g. chemistry-climate models allow the effects of climate change on the ozone hole to be studied. [44]

See also

Related Research Articles

Climate model Quantitative methods used to simulate climate

Numerical Climate models use quantitative methods to simulate the interactions of the important drivers of climate, including atmosphere, oceans, land surface and ice. They are used for a variety of purposes from study of the dynamics of the climate system to projections of future climate. Climate models may also be qualitative models and also narratives, largely descriptive, of possible futures.

Climatology The scientific study of climate, defined as weather conditions averaged over a period of time

Climatology or climate science is the scientific study of climate, scientifically defined as weather conditions averaged over a period of time. This modern field of study is regarded as a branch of the atmospheric sciences and a subfield of physical geography, which is one of the Earth sciences. Climatology now includes aspects of oceanography and biogeochemistry.

Atmospheric science The study of the atmosphere, its processes, and interactions with other systems

Atmospheric science is the study of the Earth's atmosphere and its various inner-working physical processes. Meteorology includes atmospheric chemistry and atmospheric physics with a major focus on weather forecasting. Climatology is the study of atmospheric changes that define average climates and their change over time, due to both natural and anthropogenic climate variability. Aeronomy is the study of the upper layers of the atmosphere, where dissociation and ionization are important. Atmospheric science has been extended to the field of planetary science and the study of the atmospheres of the planets and natural satellites of the solar system.

Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) is a standard experimental protocol for global atmospheric general circulation models (AGCMs). It provides a community-based infrastructure in support of climate model diagnosis, validation, intercomparison, documentation and data access. Virtually the entire international climate modeling community has participated in this project since its inception in 1990.

Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory facility in Princeton, United States

The Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) is a laboratory in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR). The current director is Dr. Venkatachalam Ramaswamy. It is one of seven NOAA Research Laboratories (RLs).

Numerical weather prediction uses mathematical models of the atmosphere and oceans to predict the weather based on current weather conditions

Numerical weather prediction (NWP) uses mathematical models of the atmosphere and oceans to predict the weather based on current weather conditions. Though first attempted in the 1920s, it was not until the advent of computer simulation in the 1950s that numerical weather predictions produced realistic results. A number of global and regional forecast models are run in different countries worldwide, using current weather observations relayed from radiosondes, weather satellites and other observing systems as inputs.

HadCM3 is a coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation model (AOGCM) developed at the Hadley Centre in the United Kingdom. It was one of the major models used in the IPCC Third Assessment Report in 2001.

Parameterization in a weather or climate model in the context of numerical weather prediction is a method of replacing processes that are too small-scale or complex to be physically represented in the model by a simplified process. This can be contrasted with other processes—e.g., large-scale flow of the atmosphere—that are explicitly resolved within the models. Associated with these parameterizations are various parameters used in the simplified processes. Examples include the descent rate of raindrops, convective clouds, simplifications of the atmospheric radiative transfer on the basis of atmospheric radiative transfer codes, and cloud microphysics. Radiative parameterizations are important to both atmospheric and oceanic modeling alike. Atmospheric emissions from different sources within individual grid boxes also need to be parameterized to determine their impact on air quality.

Ensemble forecasting

Ensemble forecasting is a method used in numerical weather prediction. Instead of making a single forecast of the most likely weather, a set of forecasts is produced. This set of forecasts aims to give an indication of the range of possible future states of the atmosphere. Ensemble forecasting is a form of Monte Carlo analysis. The multiple simulations are conducted to account for the two usual sources of uncertainty in forecast models: (1) the errors introduced by the use of imperfect initial conditions, amplified by the chaotic nature of the evolution equations of the atmosphere, which is often referred to as sensitive dependence on initial conditions; and (2) errors introduced because of imperfections in the model formulation, such as the approximate mathematical methods to solve the equations. Ideally, the verified future atmospheric state should fall within the predicted ensemble spread, and the amount of spread should be related to the uncertainty (error) of the forecast. In general, this approach can be used to make probabilistic forecasts of any dynamical system, and not just for weather prediction.

Joseph Smagorinsky American meteorologist

Joseph Smagorinsky was an American meteorologist and the first director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)'s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL).

Atmospheric thermodynamics is the study of heat-to-work transformations that take place in the earth's atmosphere and manifest as weather or climate. Atmospheric thermodynamics use the laws of classical thermodynamics, to describe and explain such phenomena as the properties of moist air, the formation of clouds, atmospheric convection, boundary layer meteorology, and vertical instabilities in the atmosphere. Atmospheric thermodynamic diagrams are used as tools in the forecasting of storm development. Atmospheric thermodynamics forms a basis for cloud microphysics and convection parameterizations used in numerical weather models and is used in many climate considerations, including convective-equilibrium climate models.

Atmospheric model mathematical model based on the dynamical equations which govern atmospheric motions

An atmospheric model is a mathematical model constructed around the full set of primitive dynamical equations which govern atmospheric motions. It can supplement these equations with parameterizations for turbulent diffusion, radiation, moist processes, heat exchange, soil, vegetation, surface water, the kinematic effects of terrain, and convection. Most atmospheric models are numerical, i.e. they discretize equations of motion. They can predict microscale phenomena such as tornadoes and boundary layer eddies, sub-microscale turbulent flow over buildings, as well as synoptic and global flows. The horizontal domain of a model is either global, covering the entire Earth, or regional (limited-area), covering only part of the Earth. The different types of models run are thermotropic, barotropic, hydrostatic, and nonhydrostatic. Some of the model types make assumptions about the atmosphere which lengthens the time steps used and increases computational speed.

Syukuro Manabe Japanese scientist

Syukuro "Suki" Manabe is a meteorologist and climatologist who pioneered the use of computers to simulate global climate change and natural climate variations.

Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Coupled Model is a coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation model (AOGCM) developed at the NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in the United States. It is one of the leading climate models used in the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC, along with models developed at the Max Planck Institute for Climate Research, the Hadley Centre and the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

ECHAM is a general circulation model (GCM) developed by the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, one of the research organisations of the Max Planck Society. It was created by modifying global forecast models developed by ECMWF to be used for climate research. The model was given its name as a combination of its origin and the place of development of its parameterisation package, Hamburg. The default configuration of the model resolves the atmosphere up to 10 hPa, but it can be reconfigured to 0.01 hPa for use in studying the stratosphere and lower mesosphere.

History of numerical weather prediction

The history of numerical weather prediction considers how current weather conditions as input into mathematical models of the atmosphere and oceans to predict the weather and future sea state has changed over the years. Though first attempted manually in the 1920s, it was not until the advent of the computer and computer simulation that computation time was reduced to less than the forecast period itself. ENIAC was used to create the first forecasts via computer in 1950, and over the years more powerful computers have been used to increase the size of initial datasets as well as include more complicated versions of the equations of motion. The development of global forecasting models led to the first climate models. The development of limited area (regional) models facilitated advances in forecasting the tracks of tropical cyclone as well as air quality in the 1970s and 1980s.

Regional Ocean Modeling System A free-surface, terrain-following, primitive equations ocean model

Regional Ocean Modeling System (ROMS) is a free-surface, terrain-following, primitive equations ocean model widely used by the scientific community for a diverse range of applications. The model is developed and supported by researchers at the Rutgers University, University of California Los Angeles and contributors worldwide.

Ocean general circulation models (OGCMs) are a particular kind of general circulation model to describe physical and thermodynamical processes in oceans. The oceanic general circulation is defined as the horizontal space scale and time scale larger than mesoscale. They depict oceans using a three-dimensional grid that include active thermodynamics and hence are most directly applicable to climate studies. They are the most advanced tools currently available for simulating the response of the global ocean system to increasing greenhouse gas concentrations. A hierarchy of OGCMs have been developed that include varying degrees of spatial coverage, resolution, geographical realism, process detail, etc.

Representations of the atmospheric boundary layer in global climate models play a role in simulations of past, present, and future climates. Representing the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) within global climate models (GCMs) are difficult due to differences in surface type, scale mismatch between physical processes affecting the ABL and scales at which GCMs are run, and difficulties in measuring different physical processes within the ABL. Various parameterization techniques described below attempt to address the difficulty in ABL representations within GCMs.

Earth systems Models of Intermediate Complexity (EMICs) form an important class of climate models, primarily used to investigate the earth's systems on long timescales or at reduced computational cost. This is mostly achieved through operation at lower temporal and spatial resolution than more comprehensive general circulation models (GCMs). Due to the non-linear relationship between spatial resolution and model run-speed, modest reductions in resolution can lead to large improvements in model run-speed. This has historically allowed the inclusion of previously unincorporated earth-systems such as ice sheets and carbon cycle feedbacks. These benefits are conventionally understood to come at the cost of some model accuracy. However, the degree to which higher resolution models improve accuracy rather than simply precision is contested..


  1. 1 2 3 ": The First Climate Model". NOAA 200th Celebration. 2007. Retrieved 20 April 2010.
  2. Phillips, Norman A. (April 1956). "The general circulation of the atmosphere: a numerical experiment". Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society. 82 (352): 123–154. Bibcode:1956QJRMS..82..123P. doi:10.1002/qj.49708235202.
  3. Cox, John D. (2002). Storm Watchers . John Wiley & Sons, Inc. p. 210. ISBN   978-0-471-38108-2.
  4. 1 2 Lynch, Peter (2006). "The ENIAC Integrations". The Emergence of Numerical Weather Prediction. Cambridge University Press. pp. 206–208. ISBN   978-0-521-85729-1.
  5. Collins, William D.; et al. (June 2004). "Description of the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model (CAM 3.0)" (PDF). University Corporation for Atmospheric Research . Retrieved 3 January 2011.
  6. Xue, Yongkang & Michael J. Fennessey (20 March 1996). "Impact of vegetation properties on U.S. summer weather prediction". Journal of Geophysical Research . American Geophysical Union. 101 (D3): 7419. Bibcode:1996JGR...101.7419X. CiteSeerX . doi:10.1029/95JD02169.
  7. McGuffie, K. & A. Henderson-Sellers (2005). A climate modelling primer. John Wiley and Sons. p. 188. ISBN   978-0-470-85751-9.
  8. "Pubs.GISS: Sun and Hansen 2003: Climate simulations for 1951-2050 with a coupled atmosphere-ocean model". 2003. Retrieved 25 August 2015.
  9. "Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project". The Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Retrieved 21 April 2010.
  10. Jablonowski, C.; Herzog, M.; Penner, J. E.; Oehmke, R. C.; Stout, Q. F.; van Leer, B. (2004). "Adaptive Grids for Weather and Climate Models". CiteSeerX .Cite journal requires |journal= (help) See also Jablonowski, Christiane. "Adaptive Mesh Refinement (AMR) for Weather and Climate Models". Archived from the original on 28 August 2016. Retrieved 24 July 2010.
  11. NCAR Command Language documentation: Non-uniform grids that NCL can contour Archived 3 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine (Retrieved 24 July 2010)
  12. "High Resolution Global Environmental Modelling (HiGEM) home page". Natural Environment Research Council and Met Office. 18 May 2004. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
  13. "Mesoscale modelling". Archived from the original on 29 December 2010. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
  14. "Climate Model Will Be First To Use A Geodesic Grid". Daly University Science News. 24 September 2001. Retrieved 3 May 2011.
  15. "Gridding the sphere". MIT GCM. Retrieved 9 September 2010.
  16. "IPCC Third Assessment Report - Climate Change 2001 - Complete online versions". IPCC. Archived from the original on 12 January 2014. Retrieved 12 January 2014.
  17. "Arakawa's Computation Device". Retrieved 18 February 2012.
  18. "COLA Report 27". 1 July 1996. Archived from the original on 6 February 2012. Retrieved 18 February 2012.
  19. "Table 2-10". Retrieved 18 February 2012.
  20. "Table of Rudimentary CMIP Model Features". 2 December 2004. Retrieved 18 February 2012.
  21. "General Circulation Models of the Atmosphere". Retrieved 18 February 2012.
  22. 1 2 NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) (9 October 2012), NOAA GFDL Climate Research Highlights Image Gallery: Patterns of Greenhouse Warming, NOAA GFDL
  23. "Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis". Archived from the original on 18 February 2012. Retrieved 18 February 2012.
  24. 1 2 "Chapter 3: Projected climate change and its impacts". IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report: Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers., in IPCC AR4 SYR 2007
  25. Pope, V. (2008). "Met Office: The scientific evidence for early action on climate change". Met Office website. Archived from the original on 29 December 2010. Retrieved 7 March 2009.
  26. Sokolov, A.P.; et al. (2009). "Probabilistic Forecast for 21st century Climate Based on Uncertainties in Emissions (without Policy) and Climate Parameters" (PDF). Journal of Climate. 22 (19): 5175–5204. Bibcode:2009JCli...22.5175S. doi:10.1175/2009JCLI2863.1.
  27. 1 2 IPCC, Summary for Policy Makers Archived 7 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine , Figure 4 Archived 21 October 2016 at the Wayback Machine , in IPCC TAR WG1 (2001), Houghton, J. T.; Ding, Y.; Griggs, D. J.; Noguer, M.; van der Linden, P. J.; Dai, X.; Maskell, K.; Johnson, C. A. (eds.), Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, ISBN   978-0-521-80767-8, archived from the original on 30 March 2016 (pb: 0-521-01495-6).
  28. "Simulated global warming 1860–2000". Archived from the original on 27 May 2006.
  29. "Decadal Forecast 2013". Met Office. January 2014.
  30. The National Academies Press website press release, Jan. 12, 2000: Reconciling Observations of Global Temperature Change.
  31. Nasa Liftoff to Space Exploration Website: Greenhouse Effect. Recovered 1 Oct 2012.
  32. "Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis" (PDF). IPCC. p. 90.
  33. Soden, Brian J.; Held, Isaac M. (2006). "An Assessment of Climate Feedbacks in Coupled Ocean–Atmosphere Models". J. Climate. 19 (14): 3354–3360. Bibcode:2006JCli...19.3354S. doi:10.1175/JCLI3799.1.
  34. Soden, Brian J. (February 2000). "The Sensitivity of the Tropical Hydrological Cycle to ENSO". Journal of Climate. 13: 538–549.
  35. Cubasch et al., Chapter 9: Projections of Future Climate Change Archived 16 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine , Executive Summary [ dead link ], in IPCC TAR WG1 (2001), Houghton, J. T.; Ding, Y.; Griggs, D. J.; Noguer, M.; van der Linden, P. J.; Dai, X.; Maskell, K.; Johnson, C. A. (eds.), Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, ISBN   978-0-521-80767-8, archived from the original on 30 March 2016 (pb: 0-521-01495-6).
  36. Flato, Gregory (2013). "Evaluation of Climate Models" (PDF). IPCC. pp. 768–769. Retrieved 22 February 2014.
  37. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 3 May 2008. Retrieved 7 February 2016.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) ECMWF-Newsletter spring 2016
  38. "What are general circulation models (GCM)?". Retrieved 18 February 2012.
  39. Meehl et al., Climate Change 2007 Chapter 10: Global Climate Projections Archived 15 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine ,[ page needed ] in IPCC AR4 WG1 (2007), Solomon, S.; Qin, D.; Manning, M.; Chen, Z.; Marquis, M.; Averyt, K.B.; Tignor, M.; Miller, H.L. (eds.), Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, ISBN   978-0-521-88009-1 (pb: 978-0-521-70596-7)
  40. ARPEGE-Climat homepage, Version 5.1 Archived 4 January 2016 at the Wayback Machine , 3 Sep 2009. Retrieved 1 Oct 2012. ARPEGE-Climat homepage Archived 19 February 2014 at the Wayback Machine , 6 Aug 2009. Retrieved 1 Oct 2012.
  41. "emics1". Retrieved 25 August 2015.
  42. Wang, W.C.; P.H. Stone (1980). "Effect of ice-albedo feedback on global sensitivity in a one-dimensional radiative-convective climate model". J. Atmos. Sci. 37 (3): 545–52. Bibcode:1980JAtS...37..545W. doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1980)037<0545:EOIAFO>2.0.CO;2 . Retrieved 22 April 2010.
  43. Allen, Jeannie (February 2004). "Tango in the Atmosphere: Ozone and Climate Change". NASA Earth Observatory. Retrieved 20 April 2010.

Further reading