Kengo Sudo

Prof. Kengo Sudo

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
8 July 2019 in Geoscientific Model Development
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HTHiroaki Tatebe
Hiroaki Tatebe
TOTomoo Ogura
Tomoo Ogura
TNTomoko Nitta
Tomoko Nitta
YKYoshiki Komuro
Yoshiki Komuro
KOKoji Ogochi
Koji Ogochi
MKMasahide Kimoto
Masahide Kimoto
The sixth version of the Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate (MIROC), called MIROC6, was cooperatively developed by a Japanese modeling community. In the present paper, simulated mean climate, internal climate variability, and climate sensitivity in MIROC6 are evaluated and briefly summarized in comparison with the previous version of our climate model (MIROC5) and observations. The results show that the overall reproducibility of mean climate and internal climate variability in MIROC6 is better than that in MIROC5. The tropical climate systems (e.g., summertime precipitation in the western Pacific and the eastward-propagating Madden–Julian oscillation) and the midlatitude atmospheric circulation (e.g., the westerlies, the polar night jet, and troposphere–stratosphere interactions) are significantly improved in MIROC6. These improvements can be attributed to the newly implemented parameterization for shallow convective processes and to the inclusion of the stratosphere. While there are significant differences in climates and variabilities between the two models, the effective climate sensitivity of 2.6 K remains the same because the differences in radiative forcing and climate feedback tend to offset each other. With an aim towards contributing to the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, designated simulations tackling a wide range of climate science issues, as well as seasonal to decadal climate predictions and future climate projections, are currently ongoing using MIROC6.

21 February 2013 in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PYP. J. Young
P. J. Young
AAA. T. Archibald
A. T. Archibald
KBK. W. Bowman
K. W. Bowman
JLJ.-F. Lamarque
J.-F. Lamarque
VNV. Naik
V. Naik
GZG. Zeng
G. Zeng
Present day tropospheric ozone and its changes between 1850 and 2100 are considered, analysing 15 global models that participated in the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP). The ensemble mean compares well against present day observations. The seasonal cycle correlates well, except for some locations in the tropical upper troposphere. Most (75 %) of the models are encompassed with a range of global mean tropospheric ozone column estimates from satellite data, but there is a suggestion of a high bias in the Northern Hemisphere and a low bias in the Southern Hemisphere, which could indicate deficiencies with the ozone precursor emissions. Compared to the present day ensemble mean tropospheric ozone burden of 337 ± 23 Tg, the ensemble mean burden for 1850 time slice is ~30% lower. Future changes were modelled using emissions and climate projections from four Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). Compared to 2000, the relative changes in the ensemble mean tropospheric ozone burden in 2030 (2100) for the different RCPs are: −4% (−16%) for RCP2.6, 2% (−7%) for RCP4.5, 1% (−9%) for RCP6.0, and 7% (18%) for RCP8.5. Model agreement on the magnitude of the change is greatest for larger changes. Reductions in most precursor emissions are common across the RCPs and drive ozone decreases in all but RCP8.5, where doubled methane and a 40–150% greater stratospheric influx (estimated from a subset of models) increase ozone. While models with a high ozone burden for the present day also have high ozone burdens for the other time slices, no model consistently predicts large or small ozone changes; i.e. the magnitudes of the burdens and burden changes do not appear to be related simply, and the models are sensitive to emissions and climate changes in different ways. Spatial patterns of ozone changes are well correlated across most models, but are notably different for models without time evolving stratospheric ozone concentrations. A unified approach to ozone budget specifications and a rigorous investigation of the factors that drive tropospheric ozone is recommended to help future studies attribute ozone changes and inter-model differences more clearly.

15 March 2013 in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DSDavid Stevenson
David Stevenson
PYP. J. Young
P. J. Young
VNV. Naik
V. Naik
JLJ.-F. Lamarque
J.-F. Lamarque
DSD. T. Shindell
D. T. Shindell
AAA. Archibald
A. Archibald
Ozone (O3) from 17 atmospheric chemistry models taking part in the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) has been used to calculate tropospheric ozone radiative forcings (RFs). All models applied a common set of anthropogenic emissions, which are better constrained for the present-day than the past. Future anthropogenic emissions follow the four Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios, which define a relatively narrow range of possible air pollution emissions. We calculate a value for the pre-industrial (1750) to present-day (2010) tropospheric ozone RF of 410 mW m−2. The model range of pre-industrial to present-day changes in O3 produces a spread (±1 standard deviation) in RFs of ±17%. Three different radiation schemes were used – we find differences in RFs between schemes (for the same ozone fields) of ±10%. Applying two different tropopause definitions gives differences in RFs of ±3%. Given additional (unquantified) uncertainties associated with emissions, climate-chemistry interactions and land-use change, we estimate an overall uncertainty of ±30% for the tropospheric ozone RF. Experiments carried out by a subset of six models attribute tropospheric ozone RF to increased emissions of methane (44±12%), nitrogen oxides (31 ± 9%), carbon monoxide (15 ± 3%) and non-methane volatile organic compounds (9 ± 2%); earlier studies attributed more of the tropospheric ozone RF to methane and less to nitrogen oxides. Normalising RFs to changes in tropospheric column ozone, we find a global mean normalised RF of 42 mW m−2 DU−1, a value similar to previous work. Using normalised RFs and future tropospheric column ozone projections we calculate future tropospheric ozone RFs (mW m−2; relative to 1750) for the four future scenarios (RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6.0 and RCP8.5) of 350, 420, 370 and 460 (in 2030), and 200, 300, 280 and 600 (in 2100). Models show some coherent responses of ozone to climate change: decreases in the tropical lower troposphere, associated with increases in water vapour; and increases in the sub-tropical to mid-latitude upper troposphere, associated with increases in lightning and stratosphere-to-troposphere transport. Climate change has relatively small impacts on global mean tropospheric ozone RF.

7 February 2013 in Geoscientific Model Development
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JLJ.-F. Lamarque
J.-F. Lamarque
DSD. T. Shindell
D. T. Shindell
BJB. Josse
B. Josse
PYP. J. Young
P. J. Young
ICI. Cionni
I. Cionni
GZG. Zeng
G. Zeng
The Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) consists of a series of time slice experiments targeting the long-term changes in atmospheric composition between 1850 and 2100, with the goal of documenting composition changes and the associated radiative forcing. In this overview paper, we introduce the ACCMIP activity, the various simulations performed (with a requested set of 14) and the associated model output. The 16 ACCMIP models have a wide range of horizontal and vertical resolutions, vertical extent, chemistry schemes and interaction with radiation and clouds. While anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions were specified for all time slices in the ACCMIP protocol, it is found that the natural emissions are responsible for a significant range across models, mostly in the case of ozone precursors. The analysis of selected present-day climate diagnostics (precipitation, temperature, specific humidity and zonal wind) reveals biases consistent with state-of-the-art climate models. The model-to-model comparison of changes in temperature, specific humidity and zonal wind between 1850 and 2000 and between 2000 and 2100 indicates mostly consistent results. However, models that are clear outliers are different enough from the other models to significantly affect their simulation of atmospheric chemistry.

15 March 2013 in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DSD. T. Shindell
D. T. Shindell
JLJ.-F. Lamarque
J.-F. Lamarque
MSM. Schulz
M. Schulz
MFM. Flanner
M. Flanner
CJC. Jiao
C. Jiao
FLF. Lo
F. Lo
The Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) examined the short-lived drivers of climate change in current climate models. Here we evaluate the 10 ACCMIP models that included aerosols, 8 of which also participated in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5). The models reproduce present-day total aerosol optical depth (AOD) relatively well, though many are biased low. Contributions from individual aerosol components are quite different, however, and most models underestimate east Asian AOD. The models capture most 1980–2000 AOD trends well, but underpredict increases over the Yellow/Eastern Sea. They strongly underestimate absorbing AOD in many regions. We examine both the direct radiative forcing (RF) and the forcing including rapid adjustments (effective radiative forcing; ERF, including direct and indirect effects). The models' all-sky 1850 to 2000 global mean annual average total aerosol RF is (mean; range) −0.26 W m−2; −0.06 to −0.49 W m−2. Screening based on model skill in capturing observed AOD yields a best estimate of −0.42 W m−2; −0.33 to −0.50 W m−2, including adjustment for missing aerosol components in some models. Many ACCMIP and CMIP5 models appear to produce substantially smaller aerosol RF than this best estimate. Climate feedbacks contribute substantially (35 to −58%) to modeled historical aerosol RF. The 1850 to 2000 aerosol ERF is −1.17 W m−2; −0.71 to −1.44 W m−2. Thus adjustments, including clouds, typically cause greater forcing than direct RF. Despite this, the multi-model spread relative to the mean is typically the same for ERF as it is for RF, or even smaller, over areas with substantial forcing. The largest 1850 to 2000 negative aerosol RF and ERF values are over and near Europe, south and east Asia and North America. ERF, however, is positive over the Sahara, the Karakoram, high Southern latitudes and especially the Arctic. Global aerosol RF peaks in most models around 1980, declining thereafter with only weak sensitivity to the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP). One model, however, projects approximately stable RF levels, while two show increasingly negative RF due to nitrate (not included in most models). Aerosol ERF, in contrast, becomes more negative during 1980 to 2000. During this period, increased Asian emissions appear to have a larger impact on aerosol ERF than European and North American decreases due to their being upwind of the large, relatively pristine Pacific Ocean. There is no clear relationship between historical aerosol ERF and climate sensitivity in the CMIP5 subset of ACCMIP models. In the ACCMIP/CMIP5 models, historical aerosol ERF of about −0.8 to −1.5 W m−2 is most consistent with observed historical warming. Aerosol ERF masks a large portion of greenhouse forcing during the late 20th and early 21st century at the global scale. Regionally, aerosol ERF is so large that net forcing is negative over most industrialized and biomass burning regions through 1980, but remains strongly negative only over east and southeast Asia by 2000. Net forcing is strongly positive by 1980 over most deserts, the Arctic, Australia, and most tropical oceans. Both the magnitude of and area covered by positive forcing expand steadily thereafter.

13 February 2017 in Geoscientific Model Development
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
OMOlaf Morgenstern
Olaf Morgenstern
MHMichaela I. Hegglin
Michaela I. Hegglin
Eugene RozanovEugene Rozanov
Eugene Rozanov
FOFiona O'Connor
Fiona O'Connor
NAN. Luke Abraham
N. Luke Abraham
GZGuang Zeng
Guang Zeng
We present an overview of state-of-the-art chemistry–climate and chemistry transport models that are used within phase 1 of the Chemistry–Climate Model Initiative (CCMI-1). The CCMI aims to conduct a detailed evaluation of participating models using process-oriented diagnostics derived from observations in order to gain confidence in the models' projections of the stratospheric ozone layer, tropospheric composition, air quality, where applicable global climate change, and the interactions between them. Interpretation of these diagnostics requires detailed knowledge of the radiative, chemical, dynamical, and physical processes incorporated in the models. Also an understanding of the degree to which CCMI-1 recommendations for simulations have been followed is necessary to understand model responses to anthropogenic and natural forcing and also to explain inter-model differences. This becomes even more important given the ongoing development and the ever-growing complexity of these models. This paper also provides an overview of the available CCMI-1 simulations with the aim of informing CCMI data users.