The impact of stratospheric ozone on the tropospheric general circulation of the Southern Hemisphere (SH) is examined with a set of chemistry‐climate models participating in the Stratospheric Processes and their Role in Climate (SPARC)/Chemistry‐Climate Model Validation project phase 2 (CCMVal‐2). Model integrations of both the past and future climates reveal the crucial role of stratospheric ozone in driving SH circulation change: stronger ozone depletion in late spring generally leads to greater poleward displacement and intensification of the tropospheric midlatitude jet, and greater expansion of the SH Hadley cell in the summer. These circulation changes are systematic as poleward displacement of the jet is typically accompanied by intensification of the jet and expansion of the Hadley cell. Overall results are compared with coupled models participating in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC AR4), and possible mechanisms are discussed. While the tropospheric circulation response appears quasi‐linearly related to stratospheric ozone changes, the quantitative response to a given forcing varies considerably from one model to another. This scatter partly results from differences in model climatology. It is shown that poleward intensification of the westerly jet is generally stronger in models whose climatological jet is biased toward lower latitudes. This result is discussed in the context of quasi‐geostrophic zonal mean dynamics.

Projections of stratospheric ozone from a suite of chemistry-climate models (CCMs) have been analyzed. In addition to a reference simulation where anthropogenic halogenated ozone depleting substances (ODSs) and greenhouse gases (GHGs) vary with time, sensitivity simulations with either ODS or GHG concentrations fixed at 1960 levels were performed to disaggregate the drivers of projected ozone changes. These simulations were also used to assess the two distinct milestones of ozone returning to historical values (ozone return dates) and ozone no longer being influenced by ODSs (full ozone recovery). The date of ozone returning to historical values does not indicate complete recovery from ODSs in most cases, because GHG-induced changes accelerate or decelerate ozone changes in many regions. In the upper stratosphere where CO₂-induced stratospheric cooling increases ozone, full ozone recovery is projected to not likely have occurred by 2100 even though ozone returns to its 1980 or even 1960 levels well before (~2025 and 2040, respectively). In contrast, in the tropical lower stratosphere ozone decreases continuously from 1960 to 2100 due to projected increases in tropical upwelling, while by around 2040 it is already very likely that full recovery from the effects of ODSs has occurred, although ODS concentrations are still elevated by this date. In the midlatitude lower stratosphere the evolution differs from that in the tropics, and rather than a steady decrease in ozone, first a decrease in ozone is simulated from 1960 to 2000, which is then followed by a steady increase through the 21st century. Ozone in the midlatitude lower stratosphere returns to 1980 levels by ~2045 in the Northern Hemisphere (NH) and by ~2055 in the Southern Hemisphere (SH), and full ozone recovery is likely reached by 2100 in both hemispheres. Overall, in all regions except the tropical lower stratosphere, full ozone recovery from ODSs occurs significantly later than the return of total column ozone to its 1980 level. The latest return of total column ozone is projected to occur over Antarctica (~2045–2060) whereas it is not likely that full ozone recovery is reached by the end of the 21st century in this region. Arctic total column ozone is projected to return to 1980 levels well before polar stratospheric halogen loading does so (~2025–2030 for total column ozone, cf. 2050–2070 for Cl_y+60×Br_y) and it is likely that full recovery of total column ozone from the effects of ODSs has occurred by ~2035. In contrast to the Antarctic, by 2100 Arctic total column ozone is projected to be above 1960 levels, but not in the fixed GHG simulation, indicating that climate change plays a significant role.

This paper examines the possible linkage between the recent reduction in Arctic sea‐ice extent and the wintertime Arctic Oscillation (AO)/North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). Observational analyses using the ERA interim reanalysis and merged Hadley/Optimum Interpolation Sea Surface Temperature data reveal that a reduced (increased) sea‐ice area in November leads to more negative (positive) phases of the AO and NAO in early and late winter, respectively. We simulate the atmospheric response to observed sea‐ice anomalies using a high‐top atmospheric general circulation model (AGCM for Earth Simulator, AFES version 4.1). The results from the simulation reveal that the recent Arctic sea‐ice reduction results in cold winters in mid‐latitude continental regions, which are linked to an anomalous circulation pattern similar to the negative phase of AO/NAO with an increased frequency of large negative AO events by a factor of over two. Associated with this negative AO/NAO phase, cold air advection from the Arctic to the mid‐latitudes increases. We found that the stationary Rossby wave response to the sea‐ice reduction in the Barents Sea region induces this anomalous circulation. We also found a positive feedback mechanism resulting from the anomalous meridional circulation that cools the mid‐latitudes and warms the Arctic, which adds an extra heating to the Arctic air column equivalent to about 60% of the direct surface heat release from the sea‐ice reduction. The results from this high‐top model experiment also suggested a critical role of the stratosphere in deepening the tropospheric annular mode and modulation of the NAO in mid to late winter through stratosphere‐troposphere coupling.

Wide disagreement among individual modeling studies has contributed to a debate on the role of recent sea ice loss in the Arctic amplification of global warming and the Siberian wintertime cooling trend. We perform coordinated experiments with six atmospheric general circulation models forced by the observed and climatological daily sea ice concentration and sea surface temperature. The results indicate that the impact of the recent sea ice decline is rather limited to the high‐latitude lower troposphere in winter, and the sea ice changes do not significantly lead to colder winters over Siberia. The observed wintertime Siberian temperature and corresponding circulation trends are reproduced in a small number of ensemble members but not by the multimodel ensemble mean, suggesting that atmospheric internal dynamics could have played a major role in the observed trends.

[1] The stratospheric climate and variability from simulations of sixteen chemistry‐climate models is evaluated. On average the polar night jet is well reproduced though its variability is less well reproduced with a large spread between models. Polar temperature biases are less than 5 K except in the Southern Hemisphere (SH) lower stratosphere in spring. The accumulated area of low temperatures responsible for polar stratospheric cloud formation is accurately reproduced for the Antarctic but underestimated for the Arctic. The shape and position of the polar vortex is well simulated, as is the tropical upwelling in the lower stratosphere. There is a wide model spread in the frequency of major sudden stratospheric warnings (SSWs), late biases in the breakup of the SH vortex, and a weak annual cycle in the zonal wind in the tropical upper stratosphere. Quantitatively, “metrics” indicate a wide spread in model performance for most diagnostics with systematic biases in many, and poorer performance in the SH than in the Northern Hemisphere (NH). Correlations were found in the SH between errors in the final warming, polar temperatures, the leading mode of variability, and jet strength, and in the NH between errors in polar temperatures, frequency of major SSWs, and jet strength. Models with a stronger QBO have stronger tropical upwelling and a colder NH vortex. Both the qualitative and quantitative analysis indicate a number of common and long‐standing model problems, particularly related to the simulation of the SH and stratospheric variability.

The goal of the Chemistry‐Climate Model Validation (CCMVal) activity is to improve understanding of chemistry‐climate models (CCMs) through process‐oriented evaluation and to provide reliable projections of stratospheric ozone and its impact on climate. An appreciation of the details of model formulations is essential for understanding how models respond to the changing external forcings of greenhouse gases and ozone‐depleting substances, and hence for understanding the ozone and climate forecasts produced by the models participating in this activity. Here we introduce and review the models used for the second round (CCMVal‐2) of this intercomparison, regarding the implementation of chemical, transport, radiative, and dynamical processes in these models. In particular, we review the advantages and problems associated with approaches used to model processes of relevance to stratospheric dynamics and chemistry. Furthermore, we state the definitions of the reference simulations performed, and describe the forcing data used in these simulations. We identify some developments in chemistry‐climate modeling that make models more physically based or more comprehensive, including the introduction of an interactive ocean, online photolysis, troposphere‐stratosphere chemistry, and non‐orographic gravity‐wave deposition as linked to tropospheric convection. The relatively new developments indicate that stratospheric CCM modeling is becoming more consistent with our physically based understanding of the atmosphere.