Jin-Ho Yoon

Prof. Jin-Ho Yoon

Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, Gwangju, Korea

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
8 July 2019 in Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JGJean‐Christophe Golaz
Jean‐Christophe Golaz
PCPeter M. Caldwell
Peter M. Caldwell
LRLuke P. Van Roekel
Luke P. Van Roekel
Mark Roger PetersenMark Roger Petersen
Mark Roger Petersen
QTQi Tang
Qi Tang
QZQing Zhu
Qing Zhu
This work documents the first version of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) new Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SMv1). We focus on the standard resolution of the fully coupled physical model designed to address DOE mission‐relevant water cycle questions. Its components include atmosphere and land (110‐km grid spacing), ocean and sea ice (60 km in the midlatitudes and 30 km at the equator and poles), and river transport (55 km) models. This base configuration will also serve as a foundation for additional configurations exploring higher horizontal resolution as well as augmented capabilities in the form of biogeochemistry and cryosphere configurations. The performance of E3SMv1 is evaluated by means of a standard set of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Characterization of Klima simulations consisting of a long preindustrial control, historical simulations (ensembles of fully coupled and prescribed SSTs) as well as idealized CO2 forcing simulations. The model performs well overall with biases typical of other CMIP‐class models, although the simulated Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation is weaker than many CMIP‐class models. While the E3SMv1 historical ensemble captures the bulk of the observed warming between preindustrial (1850) and present day, the trajectory of the warming diverges from observations in the second half of the twentieth century with a period of delayed warming followed by an excessive warming trend. Using a two‐layer energy balance model, we attribute this divergence to the model's strong aerosol‐related effective radiative forcing (ERFari+aci = −1.65 W/m2) and high equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS = 5.3 K).

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.

5 August 2019 in Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PRPhilip J. Rasch
Philip J. Rasch
SXS. Xie
S. Xie
PMP.‐L. Ma
P.‐L. Ma
WLW. Lin
W. Lin
HWH. Wang
H. Wang
YYYang Yang
Yang Yang
The Energy Exascale Earth System Model Atmosphere Model version 1, the atmospheric component of the Department of Energy's Energy Exascale Earth System Model is described. The model began as a fork of the well‐known Community Atmosphere Model, but it has evolved in new ways, and coding, performance, resolution, physical processes (primarily cloud and aerosols formulations), testing and development procedures now differ significantly. Vertical resolution was increased (from 30 to 72 layers), and the model top extended to 60 km (~0.1 hPa). A simple ozone photochemistry predicts stratospheric ozone, and the model now supports increased and more realistic variability in the upper troposphere and stratosphere. An optional improved treatment of light‐absorbing particle deposition to snowpack and ice is available, and stronger connections with Earth system biogeochemistry can be used for some science problems. Satellite and ground‐based cloud and aerosol simulators were implemented to facilitate evaluation of clouds, aerosols, and aerosol‐cloud interactions. Higher horizontal and vertical resolution, increased complexity, and more predicted and transported variables have increased the model computational cost and changed the simulations considerably. These changes required development of alternate strategies for tuning and evaluation as it was not feasible to “brute force” tune the high‐resolution configurations, so short‐term hindcasts, perturbed parameter ensemble simulations, and regionally refined simulations provided guidance on tuning and parameterization sensitivity to higher resolution. A brief overview of the model and model climate is provided. Model fidelity has generally improved compared to its predecessors and the CMIP5 generation of climate models.

25 March 2019 in Geoscientific Model Development
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DSDoug M. Smith
Doug M. Smith
JSJames A. Screen
James A. Screen
CDClara Deser
Clara Deser
JCJudah Cohen
Judah Cohen
JFJohn C. Fyfe
John C. Fyfe
XZXiangdong Zhang
Xiangdong Zhang
Polar amplification – the phenomenon where external radiative forcing produces a larger change in surface temperature at high latitudes than the global average – is a key aspect of anthropogenic climate change, but its causes and consequences are not fully understood. The Polar Amplification Model Intercomparison Project (PAMIP) contribution to the sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6; Eyring et al., 2016) seeks to improve our understanding of this phenomenon through a coordinated set of numerical model experiments documented here. In particular, PAMIP will address the following primary questions: (1) what are the relative roles of local sea ice and remote sea surface temperature changes in driving polar amplification? (2) How does the global climate system respond to changes in Arctic and Antarctic sea ice? These issues will be addressed with multi-model simulations that are forced with different combinations of sea ice and/or sea surface temperatures representing present-day, pre-industrial and future conditions. The use of three time periods allows the signals of interest to be diagnosed in multiple ways. Lower-priority tier experiments are proposed to investigate additional aspects and provide further understanding of the physical processes. These experiments will address the following specific questions: what role does ocean–atmosphere coupling play in the response to sea ice? How and why does the atmospheric response to Arctic sea ice depend on the pattern of sea ice forcing? How and why does the atmospheric response to Arctic sea ice depend on the model background state? What have been the roles of local sea ice and remote sea surface temperature in polar amplification, and the response to sea ice, over the recent period since 1979? How does the response to sea ice evolve on decadal and longer timescales? A key goal of PAMIP is to determine the real-world situation using imperfect climate models. Although the experiments proposed here form a coordinated set, we anticipate a large spread across models. However, this spread will be exploited by seeking “emergent constraints” in which model uncertainty may be reduced by using an observable quantity that physically explains the intermodel spread. In summary, PAMIP will improve our understanding of the physical processes that drive polar amplification and its global climate impacts, thereby reducing the uncertainties in future projections and predictions of climate change and variability.

27 November 2020 in Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PZPeng Zhang
Peng Zhang
JJJee-Hoon Jeong
Jee-Hoon Jeong
JYJin-Ho Yoon
Jin-Ho Yoon
Hyungjun KimHyungjun Kim
Hyungjun Kim
SWSimon Wang
Simon Wang
DCDeliang Chen
Deliang Chen
A dangerous trend: How anthropogenically driven climate change is affecting heat waves and drought is one of the most important environmental issues facing societies around the globe. Zhang et al. present a 260-year-long record of temperature and soil moisture over inner East Asia that reveals an abrupt shift to hotter and drier conditions (see the Perspective by Zhang and Fang). Extreme episodes of hotter and drier climate over the past 20 years, which are unprecedented in the earlier records, are caused by a positive feedback loop between soil moisture deficits and surface warming and potentially represent the start of an irreversible trend. Science , this issue p. 1095 ; see also p. 1037

5 June 2013 in Geoscientific Model Development
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HWH. Wang
H. Wang
RER. C. Easter
R. C. Easter
PRPhilip J. Rasch
Philip J. Rasch
MWM. Wang
M. Wang
XLX. Liu
X. Liu
V VinojV Vinoj
V Vinoj
Many global aerosol and climate models, including the widely used Community Atmosphere Model version 5 (CAM5), have large biases in predicting aerosols in remote regions such as the upper troposphere and high latitudes. In this study, we conduct CAM5 sensitivity simulations to understand the role of key processes associated with aerosol transformation and wet removal affecting the vertical and horizontal long-range transport of aerosols to the remote regions. Improvements are made to processes that are currently not well represented in CAM5, which are guided by surface and aircraft measurements together with results from a multi-scale aerosol–climate model that explicitly represents convection and aerosol–cloud interactions at cloud-resolving scales. We pay particular attention to black carbon (BC) due to its importance in the Earth system and the availability of measurements. We introduce into CAM5 a new unified scheme for convective transport and aerosol wet removal with explicit aerosol activation above convective cloud base. This new implementation reduces the excessive BC aloft to better simulate observed BC profiles that show decreasing mixing ratios in the mid- to upper-troposphere. After implementing this new unified convective scheme, we examine wet removal of submicron aerosols that occurs primarily through cloud processes. The wet removal depends strongly on the subgrid-scale liquid cloud fraction and the rate of conversion of liquid water to precipitation. These processes lead to very strong wet removal of BC and other aerosols over mid- to high latitudes during winter months. With our improvements, the Arctic BC burden has a 10-fold (5-fold) increase in the winter (summer) months, resulting in a much-better simulation of the BC seasonal cycle as well. Arctic sulphate and other aerosol species also increase but to a lesser extent. An explicit treatment of BC aging with slower aging assumptions produces an additional 30-fold (5-fold) increase in the Arctic winter (summer) BC burden. This BC aging treatment, however, has minimal effect on other underpredicted species. Interestingly, our modifications to CAM5 that aim at improving prediction of high-latitude and upper-tropospheric aerosols also produce much-better aerosol optical depth (AOD) over various other regions globally when compared to multi-year AERONET retrievals. The improved aerosol distributions have impacts on other aspects of CAM5, improving the simulation of global mean liquid water path and cloud forcing.