Research Article
An evaluation of the long-wave radiative transfer code used in the Met Office Unified Model
Article first published online: 9 APR 2009
DOI: 10.1002/qj.403
Copyright © 2009 Royal Meteorological Society
Issue
1477-870X/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=75df9a494b4c87ede07cd71e1ebb66a5b767f487)
Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society
Volume 135, Issue 640, pages 619–633, April 2009 Part A
Additional Information
How to Cite
Goldblatt, C., Lenton, T. M. and Watson, A. J. (2009), An evaluation of the long-wave radiative transfer code used in the Met Office Unified Model. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 135: 619–633. doi: 10.1002/qj.403
Publication History
- Issue published online: 21 APR 2009
- Article first published online: 9 APR 2009
- Manuscript Accepted: 11 FEB 2009
- Manuscript Revised: 30 JAN 2009
- Manuscript Received: 6 JUN 2008
- Abstract
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- climate model;
- radiative forcing;
- GCM;
- carbon dioxide;
- methane;
- nitrous oxide;
- WMGHG;
- greenhouse gas
Abstract
A detailed evaluation of the radiative transfer code used in the Met Office Unified Climate/Forecast Model is performed, comparing it with a line-by-line model and testing the climatic effects of errors in a radiative--convective model. The radiative forcing at the tropopause due to CO2 changes within SRES scenarios and across Quaternary glacial cycles is represented with reasonable accuracy, suggesting that surface temperature will be correctly predicted. However, this is achieved by partial cancellation of opposing errors in upward and downward fluxes. The changes in the vertical profiles of radiative fluxes and the changes to surface and top-of-atmosphere fluxes all show significant errors, even at twice pre-industrial CO2. This causes a sign error in the change in the convective flux in the radiative--convective model. Performance of the code deteriorates rapidly above four times pre-industrial CO2. For less-abundant greenhouse gases, CH4 and N2O, the errors are larger as a proportion of their radiative forcings. Errors for surface and top-of-atmosphere fluxes for CO2 are similar to those from the mean of the general circulation model (GCM) codes submitted to the intercomparison of radiation codes for IPCC AR4, implying that errors as found here may not be uncommon in climate models. A renewed emphasis on accuracy in radiative transfer calculations and openness in intercomparison studies is necessary to improve the modelling of climate change. Copyright © 2009 Royal Meteorological Society

1477-870X/asset/QJ_centre.gif?v=1&s=d2fee3ab3fb32f9cd0ca43e3988c3000a9e944d2)
1477-870X/asset/QJ_right.gif?v=1&s=90fc1014f697e8207cc0d93392f9009d1f819973)