A new release of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI‐ESM1.2) is presented. The development focused on correcting errors in and improving the physical processes representation, as well as improving the computational performance, versatility, and overall user friendliness. In addition to new radiation and aerosol parameterizations of the atmosphere, several relatively large, but partly compensating, coding errors in the model's cloud, convection, and turbulence parameterizations were corrected. The representation of land processes was refined by introducing a multilayer soil hydrology scheme, extending the land biogeochemistry to include the nitrogen cycle, replacing the soil and litter decomposition model and improving the representation of wildfires. The ocean biogeochemistry now represents cyanobacteria prognostically in order to capture the response of nitrogen fixation to changing climate conditions and further includes improved detritus settling and numerous other refinements. As something new, in addition to limiting drift and minimizing certain biases, the instrumental record warming was explicitly taken into account during the tuning process. To this end, a very high climate sensitivity of around 7 K caused by low‐level clouds in the tropics as found in an intermediate model version was addressed, as it was not deemed possible to match observed warming otherwise. As a result, the model has a climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO₂ over preindustrial conditions of 2.77 K, maintaining the previously identified highly nonlinear global mean response to increasing CO₂ forcing, which nonetheless can be represented by a simple two‐layer model.

The new Max‐Planck‐Institute Earth System Model (MPI‐ESM) is used in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5) in a series of climate change experiments for either idealized CO₂‐only forcing or forcings based on observations and the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios. The paper gives an overview of the model configurations, experiments related forcings, and initialization procedures and presents results for the simulated changes in climate and carbon cycle. It is found that the climate feedback depends on the global warming and possibly the forcing history. The global warming from climatological 1850 conditions to 2080–2100 ranges from 1.5°C under the RCP2.6 scenario to 4.4°C under the RCP8.5 scenario. Over this range, the patterns of temperature and precipitation change are nearly independent of the global warming. The model shows a tendency to reduce the ocean heat uptake efficiency toward a warmer climate, and hence acceleration in warming in the later years. The precipitation sensitivity can be as high as 2.5% K⁻¹ if the CO₂ concentration is constant, or as small as 1.6% K⁻¹, if the CO₂ concentration is increasing. The oceanic uptake of anthropogenic carbon increases over time in all scenarios, being smallest in the experiment forced by RCP2.6 and largest in that for RCP8.5. The land also serves as a net carbon sink in all scenarios, predominantly in boreal regions. The strong tropical carbon sources found in the RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 experiments are almost absent in the RCP4.5 experiment, which can be explained by reforestation in the RCP4.5 scenario.

ECHAM6, the sixth generation of the atmospheric general circulation model ECHAM, is described. Major changes with respect to its predecessor affect the representation of shortwave radiative transfer, the height of the model top. Minor changes have been made to model tuning and convective triggering. Several model configurations, differing in horizontal and vertical resolution, are compared. As horizontal resolution is increased beyond T63, the simulated climate improves but changes are incremental; major biases appear to be limited by the parameterization of small‐scale physical processes, such as clouds and convection. Higher vertical resolution in the middle atmosphere leads to a systematic reduction in temperature biases in the upper troposphere, and a better representation of the middle atmosphere and its modes of variability. ECHAM6 represents the present climate as well as, or better than, its predecessor. The most marked improvements are evident in the circulation of the extratropics. ECHAM6 continues to have a good representation of tropical variability. A number of biases, however, remain. These include a poor representation of low‐level clouds, systematic shifts in major precipitation features, biases in the partitioning of precipitation between land and sea (particularly in the tropics), and midlatitude jets that appear to be insufficiently poleward. The response of ECHAM6 to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases is similar to that of ECHAM5. The equilibrium climate sensitivity of the mixed‐resolution (T63L95) configuration is between 2.9 and 3.4 K and is somewhat larger for the 47 level model. Cloud feedbacks and adjustments contribute positively to warming from increasing greenhouse gases.

During a development stage global climate models have their properties adjusted or tuned in various ways to best match the known state of the Earth's climate system. These desired properties are observables, such as the radiation balance at the top of the atmosphere, the global mean temperature, sea ice, clouds and wind fields. The tuning is typically performed by adjusting uncertain, or even non‐observable, parameters related to processes not explicitly represented at the model grid resolution. The practice of climate model tuning has seen an increasing level of attention because key model properties, such as climate sensitivity, have been shown to depend on frequently used tuning parameters. Here we provide insights into how climate model tuning is practically done in the case of closing the radiation balance and adjusting the global mean temperature for the Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI‐ESM). We demonstrate that considerable ambiguity exists in the choice of parameters, and present and compare three alternatively tuned, yet plausible configurations of the climate model. The impacts of parameter tuning on climate sensitivity was less than anticipated.

ICON‐A is the new icosahedral nonhydrostatic (ICON) atmospheric general circulation model in a configuration using the Max Planck Institute physics package, which originates from the ECHAM6 general circulation model, and has been adapted to account for the changed dynamical core framework. The coupling scheme between dynamics and physics employs a sequential updating by dynamics and physics, and a fixed sequence of the physical processes similar to ECHAM6. To allow a meaningful initial comparison between ICON‐A and the established ECHAM6‐LR model, a setup with similar, low resolution in terms of number of grid points and levels is chosen. The ICON‐A model is tuned on the base of the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) experiment aiming primarily at a well balanced top‐of atmosphere energy budget to make the model suitable for coupled climate and Earth system modeling. The tuning addresses first the moisture and cloud distribution to achieve the top‐of‐atmosphere energy balance, followed by the tuning of the parameterized dynamic drag aiming at reduced wind errors in the troposphere. The resulting version of ICON‐A has overall biases, which are comparable to those of ECHAM6. Problematic specific biases remain in the vertical distribution of clouds and in the stratospheric circulation, where the winter vortices are too weak. Biases in precipitable water and tropospheric temperature are, however, reduced compared to the ECHAM6. ICON‐A will serve as the basis of further development and as the atmosphere component to the coupled model, ICON‐Earth system model (ESM).

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.