State-of-the-art Earth system models typically employ grid spacings of O(100 km), which is too coarse to explicitly resolve main drivers of the flow of energy and matter across the Earth system. In this paper, we present the new ICON-Sapphire model configuration, which targets a representation of the components of the Earth system and their interactions with a grid spacing of 10 km and finer. Through the use of selected simulation examples, we demonstrate that ICON-Sapphire can (i) be run coupled globally on seasonal timescales with a grid spacing of 5 km, on monthly timescales with a grid spacing of 2.5 km, and on daily timescales with a grid spacing of 1.25 km; (ii) resolve large eddies in the atmosphere using hectometer grid spacings on limited-area domains in atmosphere-only simulations; (iii) resolve submesoscale ocean eddies by using a global uniform grid of 1.25 km or a telescoping grid with the finest grid spacing at 530 m, the latter coupled to a uniform atmosphere; and (iv) simulate biogeochemistry in an ocean-only simulation integrated for 4 years at 10 km. Comparison of basic features of the climate system to observations reveals no obvious pitfalls, even though some observed aspects remain difficult to capture. The throughput of the coupled 5 km global simulation is 126 simulated days per day employing 21 % of the latest machine of the German Climate Computing Center. Extrapolating from these results, multi-decadal global simulations including interactive carbon are now possible, and short global simulations resolving large eddies in the atmosphere and submesoscale eddies in the ocean are within reach.

Observations and models agree that the Greenland Ice Sheet (GrIS) surface mass balance (SMB) has decreased since the end of the 1990s due to an increase in meltwater runoff and that this trend will accelerate in the future. However, large uncertainties remain, partly due to different approaches for modelling the GrIS SMB, which have to weigh physical complexity or low computing time, different spatial and temporal resolutions, different forcing fields, and different ice sheet topographies and extents, which collectively make an inter-comparison difficult. Our GrIS SMB model intercomparison project (GrSMBMIP) aims to refine these uncertainties by intercomparing 13 models of four types which were forced with the same ERA-Interim reanalysis forcing fields, except for two global models. We interpolate all modelled SMB fields onto a common ice sheet mask at 1 km horizontal resolution for the period 1980–2012 and score the outputs against (1) SMB estimates from a combination of gravimetric remote sensing data from GRACE and measured ice discharge; (2) ice cores, snow pits and in situ SMB observations; and (3) remotely sensed bare ice extent from MODerate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS). Spatially, the largest spread among models can be found around the margins of the ice sheet, highlighting model deficiencies in an accurate representation of the GrIS ablation zone extent and processes related to surface melt and runoff. Overall, polar regional climate models (RCMs) perform the best compared to observations, in particular for simulating precipitation patterns. However, other simpler and faster models have biases of the same order as RCMs compared with observations and therefore remain useful tools for long-term simulations or coupling with ice sheet models. Finally, it is interesting to note that the ensemble mean of the 13 models produces the best estimate of the present-day SMB relative to observations, suggesting that biases are not systematic among models and that this ensemble estimate can be used as a reference for current climate when carrying out future model developments. However, a higher density of in situ SMB observations is required, especially in the south-east accumulation zone, where the model spread can reach 2 m w.e. yr⁻¹ due to large discrepancies in modelled snowfall accumulation.

The science guiding the EUREC⁴A campaign and its measurements is presented. EUREC⁴A comprised roughly 5 weeks of measurements in the downstream winter trades of the North Atlantic – eastward and southeastward of Barbados. Through its ability to characterize processes operating across a wide range of scales, EUREC⁴A marked a turning point in our ability to observationally study factors influencing clouds in the trades, how they will respond to warming, and their link to other components of the earth system, such as upper-ocean processes or the life cycle of particulate matter. This characterization was made possible by thousands (2500) of sondes distributed to measure circulations on meso- (200 km) and larger (500 km) scales, roughly 400 h of flight time by four heavily instrumented research aircraft; four global-class research vessels; an advanced ground-based cloud observatory; scores of autonomous observing platforms operating in the upper ocean (nearly 10 000 profiles), lower atmosphere (continuous profiling), and along the air–sea interface; a network of water stable isotopologue measurements; targeted tasking of satellite remote sensing; and modeling with a new generation of weather and climate models. In addition to providing an outline of the novel measurements and their composition into a unified and coordinated campaign, the six distinct scientific facets that EUREC⁴A explored – from North Brazil Current rings to turbulence-induced clustering of cloud droplets and its influence on warm-rain formation – are presented along with an overview of EUREC⁴A's outreach activities, environmental impact, and guidelines for scientific practice. Track data for all platforms are standardized and accessible at https://doi.org/10.25326/165 (Stevens, 2021), and a film documenting the campaign is provided as a video supplement.

This work documents the ICON‐Earth System Model (ICON‐ESM V1.0), the first coupled model based on the ICON (ICOsahedral Non‐hydrostatic) framework with its unstructured, icosahedral grid concept. The ICON‐A atmosphere uses a nonhydrostatic dynamical core and the ocean model ICON‐O builds on the same ICON infrastructure, but applies the Boussinesq and hydrostatic approximation and includes a sea‐ice model. The ICON‐Land module provides a new framework for the modeling of land processes and the terrestrial carbon cycle. The oceanic carbon cycle and biogeochemistry are represented by the Hamburg Ocean Carbon Cycle module. We describe the tuning and spin‐up of a base‐line version at a resolution typical for models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). The performance of ICON‐ESM is assessed by means of a set of standard CMIP6 simulations. Achievements are well‐balanced top‐of‐atmosphere radiation, stable key climate quantities in the control simulation, and a good representation of the historical surface temperature evolution. The model has overall biases, which are comparable to those of other CMIP models, but ICON‐ESM performs less well than its predecessor, the Max Planck Institute Earth System Model. Problematic biases are diagnosed in ICON‐ESM in the vertical cloud distribution and the mean zonal wind field. In the ocean, sub‐surface temperature and salinity biases are of concern as is a too strong seasonal cycle of the sea‐ice cover in both hemispheres. ICON‐ESM V1.0 serves as a basis for further developments that will take advantage of ICON‐specific properties such as spatially varying resolution, and configurations at very high resolution.

Earlier large-scale Greenland ice sheet sea-level projections (e.g. those run during the ice2sea and SeaRISE initiatives) have shown that ice sheet initial conditions have a large effect on the projections and give rise to important uncertainties. The goal of this initMIP-Greenland intercomparison exercise is to compare, evaluate, and improve the initialisation techniques used in the ice sheet modelling community and to estimate the associated uncertainties in modelled mass changes. initMIP-Greenland is the first in a series of ice sheet model intercomparison activities within ISMIP6 (the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6), which is the primary activity within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) focusing on the ice sheets. Two experiments for the large-scale Greenland ice sheet have been designed to allow intercomparison between participating models of (1) the initial present-day state of the ice sheet and (2) the response in two idealised forward experiments. The forward experiments serve to evaluate the initialisation in terms of model drift (forward run without additional forcing) and in response to a large perturbation (prescribed surface mass balance anomaly); they should not be interpreted as sea-level projections. We present and discuss results that highlight the diversity of data sets, boundary conditions, and initialisation techniques used in the community to generate initial states of the Greenland ice sheet. We find good agreement across the ensemble for the dynamic response to surface mass balance changes in areas where the simulated ice sheets overlap but differences arising from the initial size of the ice sheet. The model drift in the control experiment is reduced for models that participated in earlier intercomparison exercises.

The last deglaciation was characterized by drastic climate changes, most prominently melting ice sheets. Melting ice sheets have a significant impact on the atmospheric and oceanic circulation, due to changes in the topography and meltwater release into the ocean. In a set of transient simulations of the last deglaciation with the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology Earth System Model we explore differences in the climate response that arise from different boundary conditions and implementations suggested within the Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project ‐ Phase 4 (PMIP4) deglaciation protocol. The underlying ice‐sheet reconstruction dominates the simulated deglacial millennial‐scale climate variability in terms of timing and occurrence of observed climate events. Sensitivity experiments indicate that the location and timing of meltwater release from the ice sheets into the ocean are crucial for the ocean response. The results will allow a better interpretation of inter‐model differences that arise from different implementations proposed within the PMIP4 protocol.