Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T08:32:20.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Asynchronous Coupling of Ice-Sheet and Atmospheric Forcing Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

David Pollard
Affiliation:
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80307, U.S.A.
Isabelle Muszynski
Affiliation:
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80307, U.S.A.
Stephen H. Schneider
Affiliation:
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80307, U.S.A.
Starley L. Thompson
Affiliation:
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80307, U.S.A.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Asynchronous coupling schemes between ice sheet and atmospheric forcing models are evaluated for use in long-term ice-age simulations. In these schemes the ice sheet and atmospheric forcing are run together for short synchronous periods (T s), alternating with longer asynchronous periods (T A) during which the ice sheet is run with atmospheric information extrapolated from the previous synchronous period(s). Two simple ice-sheet models are used that predict ice thickness as a function of latitude, and the atmosphere is represented by a prescribed pattern of net annual accumulation minus ablation. The pattern is shifted vertically to represent long-term orbital variations, stochastic inter-annual weather variability and ice-sheet albedo feedback.

Several asynchronous schemes are evaluated by comparing results with those from fully synchronous runs. The best overall results are obtained using a scheme in which the forcing during each asynchronous period is linearly extrapolated from its means in the previous two synchronous periods. Differences from the synchronous results are caused primarily by poor sampling of the stochastic forcing component, which exaggerates the stochastic ice-sheet fluctuations. We examine how these errors depend on T s and T A, and outline implications for GCM ice-age simulations.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 1990
Figure 0

Fig. 1.Schematic Cross section of the ice sheet. h0 is the elevation of the snowline at the Arctic Ocean shoreline.

Figure 1

Fig. 2.(a) Solid curve: ice-sheet extent (distance from northern to southern tip) vs time using the diffusive ice-sheet model with synchronous coupling. Dotted curve: atmospheric forcing h0 as defined in Equation (I), (b-d) Differences from Figure 2a using: (b) non-extrapolated asynchronous coupling; (c) extrapolated asynchronous coupling; (d) least-squares asynchronous coupling.

Figure 2

Fig. 3.As for Figure 2, except using the plastic ice-sheet model and smaller amplitude in the long-term sinusoidal forcing horb.

Figure 3

Fig. 4.Errors in ice-sheet extent versus (Ts + TA)/TS using extrapolated asynchronous coupling. Each point represents a run of 200 000 year with various types of long-term forcing Aorb and different values of Ts, all with Ts + TA= 1000 year. The upper and lower shaded regions show maximum (absolute) errors and root-mean-square errors respectively. Points using the same long-term forcing are connected by straight lines, with labels A, B, C, and D indicating the forcings used in Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 3 with doubled frequency, and Figure 5, respectively. The sporadic small ice-sheet spikes such as in Figure 2c have been excluded from the “A” lines (see text).

Figure 4

Fig. 5.(a) Solid curve: ice-sheet extent using the plastic model and synchronous coupling, with stochastic forcing alone (constant horb). Dashed curve: without stochastic forcing, (b-d) Differences from the solid curve in Figure 5a using extrapolated asynchronous coupling with (b) Ts = 1 year, Ts + ΤA = 100 year; (c) Ts = 10 year, Ts + TA = 1000 year; (d) Ts = 30 year, Ts + TA = 3000 year.