Sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) are large, rapid temperature rises in the winter polar stratosphere, occurring predominantly in the Northern Hemisphere. Major SSWs are also associated with a reversal of the climatological westerly zonal-mean zonal winds. Circulation anomalies associated with SSWs can descend into the troposphere with substantial surface weather impacts, such as wintertime extreme cold air outbreaks. After their discovery in 1952, SSWs were classified by the World Meteorological Organization. An examination of literature suggests that a single, original reference for an exact definition of SSWs is elusive, but in many references a definition involves the reversal of the meridional temperature gradient and, for major warmings, the reversal of the zonal circulation poleward of 60° latitude at 10 hPa. Though versions of this definition are still commonly used to detect SSWs, the details of the definition and its implementation remain ambiguous. In addition, other SSW definitions have been used in the last few decades, resulting in inconsistent classification of SSW events. We seek to answer the questions: How has the SSW definition changed, and how sensitive is the detection of SSWs to the definition used? For what kind of analysis is a “standard” definition useful? We argue that a standard SSW definition is necessary for maintaining a consistent and robust metric to assess polar stratospheric wintertime variability in climate models and other statistical applications. To provide a basis for, and to encourage participation in, a communitywide discussion currently underway, we explore what criteria are important for a standard definition and propose possible ways to update the definition.
El Niño and La Niña events in the tropical Pacific have significant and disrupting impacts on the global atmospheric and oceanic circulation. El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) impacts also extend above the troposphere, affecting the strength and variability of the stratospheric polar vortex in the high latitudes of both hemispheres, as well as the composition and circulation of the tropical stratosphere. El Niño events are associated with a warming and weakening of the polar vortex in the polar stratosphere of both hemispheres, while a cooling can be observed in the tropical lower stratosphere. These impacts are linked by a strengthened Brewer‐Dobson circulation. Anomalous upward wave propagation is observed in the extratropics of both hemispheres. For La Niña, these anomalies are often opposite. The stratosphere in turn affects surface weather and climate over large areas of the globe. Since these surface impacts are long‐lived, the changes in the stratosphere can lead to improved surface predictions on time scales of weeks to months. Over the past decade, our understanding of the mechanisms through which ENSO can drive impacts remote from the tropical Pacific has improved. This study reviews the possible mechanisms connecting ENSO to the stratosphere in the tropics and the extratropics of both hemispheres while also considering open questions, including nonlinearities in the teleconnections, the role of ENSO diversity, and the impacts of climate change and variability.
Major, sudden midwinter stratospheric warmings (SSWs) are large and rapid temperature increases in the winter polar stratosphere are associated with a complete reversal of the climatological westerly winds (i.e., the polar vortex). These extreme events can have substantial impacts on winter surface climate, including increased frequency of cold air outbreaks over North America and Eurasia and anomalous warming over Greenland and eastern Canada. Here we present a SSW Compendium (SSWC), a new database that documents the evolution of the stratosphere, troposphere, and surface conditions 60 days prior to and after SSWs for the period 1958–2014. The SSWC comprises data from six different reanalysis products: MERRA2 (1980–2014), JRA-55 (1958–2014), ERA-interim (1979–2014), ERA-40 (1958–2002), NOAA20CRv2c (1958–2011), and NCEP-NCAR I (1958–2014). Global gridded daily anomaly fields, full fields, and derived products are provided for each SSW event. The compendium will allow users to examine the structure and evolution of individual SSWs, and the variability among events and among reanalysis products. The SSWC is archived and maintained by NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI, doi:10.7289/V5NS0RWP).
27 March 2013 in Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
We describe the main differences in simulations of stratospheric climate and variability by models within the fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) that have a model top above the stratopause and relatively fine stratospheric vertical resolution (high‐top), and those that have a model top below the stratopause (low‐top). Although the simulation of mean stratospheric climate by the two model ensembles is similar, the low‐top model ensemble has very weak stratospheric variability on daily and interannual time scales. The frequency of major sudden stratospheric warming events is strongly underestimated by the low‐top models with less than half the frequency of events observed in the reanalysis data and high‐top models. The lack of stratospheric variability in the low‐top models affects their stratosphere‐troposphere coupling, resulting in short‐lived anomalies in the Northern Annular Mode, which do not produce long‐lasting tropospheric impacts, as seen in observations. The lack of stratospheric variability, however, does not appear to have any impact on the ability of the low‐top models to reproduce past stratospheric temperature trends. We find little improvement in the simulation of decadal variability for the high‐top models compared to the low‐top, which is likely related to the fact that neither ensemble produces a realistic dynamical response to volcanic eruptions.
The steady-state extratropical atmospheric response to thermal forcing is investigated in a simple atmospheric general circulation model. The thermal forcings qualitatively mimic three key aspects of anthropogenic climate change: warming in the tropical troposphere, cooling in the polar stratosphere, and warming at the polar surface. The principal novel findings are the following: 1) Warming in the tropical troposphere drives two robust responses in the model extratropical circulation: poleward shifts in the extratropical tropospheric storm tracks and a weakened stratospheric Brewer–Dobson circulation. The former result suggests heating in the tropical troposphere plays a fundamental role in the poleward contraction of the storm tracks found in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)-class climate change simulations; the latter result is in the opposite sense of the trends in the Brewer–Dobson circulation found in most previous climate change experiments. 2) Cooling in the polar stratosphere also drives a poleward shift in the extratropical storm tracks. The tropospheric response is largely consistent with that found in previous studies, but it is shown to be very sensitive to the level and depth of the forcing. In the stratosphere, the Brewer–Dobson circulation weakens at midlatitudes, but it strengthens at high latitudes because of anomalously poleward heat fluxes on the flank of the polar vortex. 3) Warming at the polar surface drives an equatorward shift of the storm tracks. The storm-track response to polar warming is in the opposite sense of the response to tropical tropospheric heating; hence large warming over the Arctic may act to attenuate the response of the Northern Hemisphere storm track to tropical heating. 4) The signs of the tropospheric and stratospheric responses to all thermal forcings considered here are robust to seasonal changes in the basic state, but the amplitude and details of the responses exhibit noticeable differences between equinoctial and wintertime conditions. Additionally, the responses exhibit marked nonlinearity in the sense that the response to multiple thermal forcings applied simultaneously is quantitatively different from the sum of the responses to the same forcings applied independently. Thus the response of the model to a given thermal forcing is demonstrably dependent on the other thermal forcings applied to the model.