Using the current seasonal cycle to constrain snow albedo feedback in future climate change
Abstract
Differences in simulations of climate feedbacks are sources of significant divergence in climate models' temperature response to anthropogenic forcing. Snow albedo feedback is particularly critical for climate change prediction in heavily‐populated northern hemisphere land masses. Here we show its strength in current models exhibits a factor‐of‐three spread. These large intermodel variations in feedback strength in climate change are nearly perfectly correlated with comparably large intermodel variations in feedback strength in the context of the seasonal cycle. Moreover, the feedback strength in the real seasonal cycle can be measured and compared to simulated values. These mostly fall outside the range of the observed estimate, suggesting many models have an unrealistic snow albedo feedback in the seasonal cycle context. Because of the tight correlation between simulated feedback strength in the seasonal cycle and climate change, eliminating the model errors in the seasonal cycle will lead directly to a reduction in the spread of feedback strength in climate change. Though this comparison to observations may put the models in an unduly harsh light because of uncertainties in the observed estimate that are difficult to quantify, our results map out a clear strategy for targeted observation of the seasonal cycle to reduce divergence in simulations of climate sensitivity.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Hall and Qu (2006) found that large inter-model variations in the seasonal cycle of the albedo between April and May in the 20th century are well correlated with similarly large inter-model variations in the snow-albedo feedback on climatological timescales.
“For example, Hall and Qu (2006) found that large inter-model variations in the seasonal cycle of the albedo between April and May in the 20th century are well correlated with similarly large inter-model variations in the snow-albedo feedback on climatological timescales.”
From The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6 (2016) · cites this paper as Hall and Qu, 2006
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 21 · Cited by 469
- Authors
- Hall, A., & Qu, X.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Geophysical Research Letters
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 0094-8276 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-8007
- OpenAlex
- W2032082343
- Cited by
- 469
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 12.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Geophysical Research Letters (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Cryospheric studies and observations
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
- Keywords
- snow-albedo feedback, seasonal cycle, climate feedbacks, inter-model spread, climate sensitivity, model evaluation against observations, Northern Hemisphere, anthropogenic forcing, temperature sensitivity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review