Climate Dynamics

, Volume 41, Issue 3–4, pp 787–802 | Cite as

Midlatitude storms in a moister world: lessons from idealized baroclinic life cycle experiments

Article

Abstract

The response of midlatitude storms to global warming remains uncertain. This is due, in part, to the competing effects of a weaker meridional surface temperature gradient and a higher low-level moisture content, both of which are projected to occur as a consequence of increasing greenhouse gases. Here we address the latter of these two effects, and try to elucidate the effect of increased moisture on the development and evolution of midlatitude storms. We do this with a set of highly controlled, baroclinic lifecycle experiments, in which atmospheric moisture is progressively increased. To assess the robustness of the results, the moisture content is changed in two different ways: first by using different initial relative humidity, and second by varying a parameter that we insert into the Clausius-Clapeyron equation. The latter method allows us to artificially increase the moisture content above current levels while keeping the relative humidity constant. Irrespective of how moisture is altered, we find that nearly all important measures of storm strength increase as the moisture content rises. Specifically, we examine the storm’s central pressure minimum, the strongest surface winds, and both extreme and accumulated precipitation rates. For all these metrics, increased moisture yields a stronger storm. Interestingly, we also find that when moisture is increased beyond current levels, the resulting storm has a reduced horizontal scale while its vertical extent increases. Finally, we note that for moisture increases comparable to those projected to occur by the end of the twentyfirst century, the actual amplitude of the increases in storm strength is relatively modest, irrespective of the specific measure one uses.

Keywords

Midlatitude storms Baroclinic Life cycles Global warming Moisture 

References

  1. Barnes EA, Hartmann DL (2012) The global distribution of atmospheric eddy-length scales. J Clim 25:3409–3416Google Scholar
  2. Bengtsson L, Hodges KI, Keenlyside N (2009) Will extratropical storms intensify in warmer climate? J Clim 22:2276–2301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Booth JF, Thompson L, Patoux J, Kelly KA (2012) Sensitivity of midlatitude storm intensification to perturbations in the sea surface temperature near the Gulf stream. Mon Weather Rev 140:1241–1256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boutle IA, Beare RJ, Belcher SE, Brown AR, Plant RS (2010) The moist boundary layer under a mid-latitude weather system. Boundary Layer Meteorol 134:367–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boutle IA, Belcher SE, Plant RS (2011) Moisture transport in mid-latitude cyclones. Q J R Meteorol Soc 137:360–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Campa J, Wernli H (2012) A PV perspective on the vertical structure of mature midlatitude cyclones in the Northern Hemisphere. J Atmos Sci 69:725–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlson TN (1998) Mid-Latitude weather systems. American Meteorological Society, BostonGoogle Scholar
  8. Catto JL, Shaffrey LC, Hodges KI (2011) Northern Hemisphere extratropical cyclones in a warming climate in the HiGEM high-resolution climate model. J Clim 24:5336–5352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Champion AJ, Hodges KI, Bengtsson LO, Keenlyside NS, Esch M (2011) Impact of increasing resolution and a warmer climate on extreme weather from Northern Hemisphere extratropical cyclones. Tellus 63A:893–906Google Scholar
  10. Chen S-H, Sun W-Y (2002) A one-dimensional time dependent cloud model. J Meteorol Soc Jpn 80:99–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Davis CA, Stoelinga MT, Kuo Y-H (1993) The integrated effect of condensation in numerical simulations of extratropical cyclogenesis. Mon Weather Rev 121:2309–2330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Emanuel KA, Fantini M, Thorpe AJ (1987) Baroclinic instability in an environment of small stability to slantwise moist convection. Part I: two-dimensional models. J Atmos Sci 44:1559–1573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fantini M (1993) A numerical study of two-dimensional moist baroclinic instability. J Atmos Sci 50:1199–1210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frierson DMW, Held IM, Zurita-Gotor P (2006) A gray-radiation aquaplanet moist GCM. Part 1: static stability and eddy scale. J Atmos Sci 63:2548–2566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gastineau G, Soden BJ (2009) Model projected changes of extreme wind events in response to global warming. Geophys Res Lett 36:L10810. doi:10.1029/2009GL037500
  16. Gutowski WJ, Branscome LE, Stewart DA (1992) Life cycles of moist baroclinic eddies. J Atmos Sci 49:306–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Held IM, Soden BJ (2006) Robust responses of the hydrological cycle to global warming. J Clim 19:5686–5699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holton JR (2004) An introduction to dynamic meteorology, 4th edn. Elsevier Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Hong S-Y, Noh Y, Dudhia J (2006) A new vertical diffusion package with an explicit treatment of entrainment processes. Mon Weather Rev 134:2318–2341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kain JS, Fritsch JM (1993) Convection parameterization for mesoscale models: the Kain-Fritsch scheme. In: Emanuel KA, Raymond DJ (eds) The representation of cumulus convection in numerical models. Amer Meteor Soc, BostonGoogle Scholar
  21. Kidston J, Dean SM, Renwick J, Vallis GK (2010) A robust increase in the eddy length scale in the simulation of future climates. Geophys Res Lett 37:L03806Google Scholar
  22. Lambert SJ, Fyfe JC (2006) Changes in winter cyclone frequencies and strengths simulated in enhanced greenhouse warming experiments: results from the models participating in the IPCC diagnostic exercise. Clim Dyn 26:713–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Li F, Collins WD, Wehner MF, Williamson DL, Olson JG (2011) Response of precipitation extremes to idealized global warming in an aqua-planet climate model: towards a robust projection across different horizontal resolutions. Tellus 63A:876–883Google Scholar
  24. Lin Y-L, Farley RD, Orville HD (1983) Bulk parameterizations of the snow field in a cloud model. J Clim Appl Meteorol 22:1065–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lorenz DJ, DeWeaver ET (2007) Tropopause height and zonal wind response to global warming in the IPCC scenario integrations. J Geophys Res 112:D10119. doi:10.10292006JD008087
  26. Mak M (1994) Cyclogenesis in a conditionally unstable moist baroclinic atmosphere. Tellus 46A:14–33Google Scholar
  27. Martin J (2006) Mid-latitude atmospheric dynamics. Wiley, West SussexGoogle Scholar
  28. Naud CM, Del Genio AD, Bauer M, Kovari W (2010) Cloud vertical distribution across warm and cold fronts in CloudSat–CALIPSO data and a general circulation model. J Clim 23:3397–3415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. O’Gorman PA, Schneider T (2009) The physical basis for increases in precipitation extremes in simulations of 21st-century climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:14773–14777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. O’Gorman PA (2011) The effective static stability experienced by eddies in a moist atmosphere. J Atmos Sci 68:75–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pavan V, Hall N, Valdes P, Blackburn N (1999) The importance of moisture distribution for the growth and energetics of baroclinic eddies. Ann Geophys 17:242–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Polvani LM, Esler JG (2007) Transport and mixing of chemical air masses in idealized baroclinic life cycles. J Geophys Res 112:D23102. doi:10.1029/2007JD008555
  33. Reed RJ, Grell G, Kuo Y-H (1993) The ERICA IOP 5 storm. Part II: sensitivity tests and further diagnosis based on model output. Mon Weather Rev 121:1595–1612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rotunno R, Skamarock WC, Snyder C (1994) An analysis of frontogenesis in numerical simulations of baroclinic waves. J Atmos Sci 51:3373–3398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sherwood SC, Roca R, Weckwerth TM, Andronova NG (2010) Tropospheric water vapor, convection and climate. Rev Geophys 48:2009RG000301Google Scholar
  36. Simmons AJ, Hoskins BJ (1978) The life cycles of some non-linear baroclinic waves. J Atmos Sci 35:414–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Skamarock WC, Klemp JB, Dudhia J, Gill DO, Barker DM, Duda M, Huang X-Y, Wang W, Powers JG (2008) A description of the advanced research WRF Version 3, NCAR Technical Note http://www.mmm.ucar.edu/people/skamarock/
  38. Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M Miller HL (eds) (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. In: Contribution of working group i to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Stoelinga MT (1996) A potential vorticity-based study on the role of diabatic heating and friction in a numerically simulated baroclinic cyclone. Mon Weather Rev 124:849–874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Thorncroft CD, Hoskins BJ, McIntyre ME (1993) Two paradigms of baroclinic wave life-cycle behaviour. Q J R Meteorol Soc 119:17–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ulbrich U, Leckebusch GC, Pinto JG (2009) Extra-tropical cyclones in the present and future climate: a review. Theor Appl Climatol 96:117–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang S, Polvani LM (2011) Double tropopause formation in idealized baroclinic life cycles: The key role of an initial tropopause inversion layer. J Geophys Res 116:D05108. doi:10.1029/2010JD015118
  43. Weisman ML, Klemp JB (1982) The dependence of numerically simulated convective storms on vertical wind shear and buoyancy. Mon Weather Rev 110:504–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wernli H, Davies HC (1997) A Lagrangian based analysis of extratropical cyclones: the method and some applications. Q J R Meteorol Soc 123:467–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Whitaker JS, Davis CA (1994) Cyclogenesis in a saturated environment. J Atmos Sci 51:889–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • James F. Booth
    • 1
  • Shuguang Wang
    • 2
  • Lorenzo Polvani
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.NASA Goddard Institute for Space StudiesNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of Applied Physics and Applied MathematicsColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lamont Doherty Earth ObservatoryColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations