CO<sub>2</sub>强迫下广东地表气温响应及其不确定性归因

孔蕴淇; 邓玉娇; 胡晓明

doi:10.16032/j.issn.1004-4965.2026.007

CO₂强迫下广东地表气温响应及其不确定性归因

doi: 10.16032/j.issn.1004-4965.2026.007

1.
广东省生态气象中心, 广东广州 510641
2.
中山大学大气科学学院, 广东珠海 519000

基金项目:

广东省基础与应用基础研究基金项目 2024A1515510009

广东省气象局科学技术项目 GRMC2023Q01

详细信息

通讯作者:
胡晓明，女，山东省人，教授，主要从事气候变化研究。E-mail：huxm6@mail.sysu.edu.cn

中图分类号: P467
计量
- 文章访问数: 1
- HTML全文浏览量: 1
- PDF下载量: 0
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2024-09-13
- 修回日期: 2025-10-08
- 网络出版日期: 2026-03-14
- 刊出日期: 2026-02-20

Surface Temperature Response to CO₂ Forcing in Guangdong: A Quantitative Attribution of Uncertainties

1.
Ecological Meteorological Center of Guangdong Province, Guangzhou 510641, China
2.
School of Atmospheric Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University and Southern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory (Zhuhai), Zhuhai, Guangdong 519000, China

摘要

摘要: 基于第六次耦合模式比较计划(Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6, 简称CMIP6)的18个气候模式模拟数据，采用了控制试验(piControl)作为稳定气候状态的参考，使用突然4倍CO₂强迫试验(abrupt-4×CO₂)来模拟极端温室气体排放情景下的气候响应，并利用气候反馈响应分析方法(CFRAM)，定量评估了外强迫、各辐射反馈过程和非辐射过程对广东省增暖及其不确定性的贡献。结果显示，广东省的增暖幅度在不同模式间存在差异，增暖范围为3.71~7.07 ℃，集中在4.42~5.40 ℃之间，且增暖在西部和北部最显著。对于多模式集合平均的增暖进行了定量归因分析，气候反馈响应分析表明，水汽反馈和二氧化碳强迫是主要的增暖驱动力，分别贡献了4.92 ℃和2.42 ℃。地表热存储和云反馈也对增暖有显著正贡献，而地表感热通量和潜热通量则表现出降温效应。在不确定性分析中，云短波辐射效应、地表感热通量和地表热存储是主要的不确定性来源，这些不确定性主要来自模式在云层物理、地表能量平衡和热量再分配方面的差异，未来研究应重点关注这些过程以提高区域气候变化预估的准确性。
- 二氧化碳 /
- 地表气温 /
- 气候反馈 /
- CMIP6 /
- 不确定性
Abstract: Based on simulations from 18 climate models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6), this study uses the piControl experiment as a reference for a base climate state and the abrup-4 × CO₂ experiment to simulate the climate response under an extreme greenhouse gas forcing scenario. The Climate Feedback Response Analysis Method (CFRAM) was employed to quantitatively evaluate the contributions of external forcings, various radiative feedback processes, and non-radiative processes to the warming over Guangdong Province and the associated uncertainties. The results show that the projected warming over Guangdong varies across models with an estimated range of 3.71 ℃ to 7.07 ℃, and a robust estimate centered between 4.42 ℃ and 5.40 ℃. The warming is most pronounced in the western and northern regions of the province. A quantitative attribution analysis of the multi-model ensemble mean indicates that water vapor feedback and CO₂ forcing are the primary drivers of the projected warming, contributing 4.92 ℃ and 2.42 ℃, respectively. Surface heat storage and cloud feedback also provide significant positive contributions to the warming, while surface sensible heat flux and latent heat flux contribute to a cooling effect. Uncertainty analysis reveals that cloud shortwave radiative effects, surface sensible heat flux, and surface heat storage are the main sources of uncertainty, stemming primarily from differences in model representations of cloud physics, surface energy balance, and heat redistribution. Future research to improve the accuracy of regional climate projections should focus on better constraining these key processes.
- carbon dioxide /
- surface temperature /
- climate feedback /
- CMIP6 /
- uncertainty

HTML全文

图 1 abrupt-4×CO₂强迫下18个模式的广东省区域增暖预估

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 外强迫和各个气候反馈过程对广东省区域平均增暖的多模式集合平均贡献

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 外强迫和各个气候反馈过程引起的广东省多模式集合平均增暖(a~j)以及总增暖(k~l)的空间分布(单位：℃)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 广东省整层大气柱的水汽含量(a，单位：kg·m-²)、总云量(b，单位：%)和整层大气柱云水/云冰含量(c，单位：g·m^-2)的多模式集合平均变化的空间分布

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 18个模式中外强迫和各个气候反馈过程对广东省区域平均增暖的贡献

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 多模式外强迫和反馈响应过程引起广东省部分增暖偏差堆叠柱状图(a)以及区域平均总增暖偏差、外强迫和反馈响应过程引起的部分增暖偏差的箱线图(b)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 外强迫和反馈响应过程引起广东省部分增暖偏差的模式间相关分析热力图

*、**、***分别表示通过0.05、0.01和0.001的显著性水平检验。

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 18个CMIP6模式的基本信息

序号	模式	分辨率
1	BCC-CSM2-MR	320×160
2	FGOALS-g3	180×90
3	MPI-ESM-1-2-HAM	192×96
4	NorESM2-MM	288×192
5	FGOALS-f3-L	360×180
6	CMCC-CM2-SR5	288×192
7	MPI-ESM1-2-LR	192×96
8	GFDL-ESM4	360×180
9	CMCC-ESM2	288×192
10	GFDL-CM4	360×180
11	IPSL-CM6A-LR	144×143
12	CESM2-WACCM-FV2	144×96
13	TaiESM1	288×192
14	CESM2-FV2	288×192
15	NorESM2-LM	144×96
16	SAM0-UNICON	288×192
17	CESM2-WACCM	288×192
18	CESM2	288×192

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(37)

[1]	Yang L, Zhao S, Liu S. Urban environments provide new perspectives for forecasting vegetation phenology responses under climate warming[J]. Global Change Biology, 2023, 29(15): 4 383-4 396.
[2]	Tian C, Yue X, Zhu J, et al. Projections of fire emissions and the consequent impacts on air quality under 1.5℃ and 2℃ global warming[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2023, 323(9): 121311.
[3]	Ji Y, Fu J, Lu Y, et al. Three-dimensional-based global drought projection under global warming tendency[J]. Atmospheric Research, 2023, 291(11): 106812.
[4]	Mukherjee S, Mishra A K, Ashfaq M, et al. Relative effect of anthropogenic warming and natural climate variability to changes in compound drought and heatwaves[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2022, 605(24): 127396.
[5]	Li H, Wu Y, Chen J, et al. Responses of soil organic carbon to climate change in the Qilian Mountains and its future projection[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2021, 596(156): 126110.
[6]	Yuan F, Wang Y, Ricciuto D M, et al. Hydrological feedbacks on peatland CH4 emission under warming and elevated CO₂: A modeling study[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2021, 603(12): 127137.
[7]	Liu L, Zhang X. Effects of temperature variability and extremes on spring phenology across the contiguous United States from 1982 to 2016[J]. Scientific Reports, 2020, 10(1): 17952.
[8]	Zhang W, Zhou T. Significant increases in extreme precipitation and the associations with global warming over the global land monsoon regions[J]. Journal of Climate, 2019, 32(24): 8 465-8 488.
[9]	Wang X, Li Y, Wang M, et al. Changes in daily extreme temperature and precipitation events in mainland China from 1960 to 2016 under global warming[J]. International Journal of Climatology, 2020, 41(2): 1 465-1 483.
[10]	IPCC. Summary for policymakers[M]. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group Ⅰ to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021.
[11]	黄珍珠, 张锦华, 时小军, 等. 全球变暖与广东气候带变化[J]. 热带地理, 2008, 28(4): 302-305, 330.
[12]	张柳红, 杜尧东, 杜家铭. 气候变化对广东省香蕉种植气候适宜性的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2024, 43(09): 2 802-2 812.
[13]	杜晓阳, 张柳红, 邓玉娇. 气候变化对广东省荔枝种植气候区划的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2022, 41(10): 1 998-2 007.
[14]	Zhao B, An D, Yan C, et al. Spatiotemporal variations of reference evapotranspiration and its climatic driving factors in Guangdong, a humid subtropical Province of South China[J]. Agronomy, 2023, 13(6): 1446.
[15]	Zhou X, Xie B, Zhang H, et al. Decomposition of Fast and Slow Cloud Responses to Quadrupled CO₂ Forcing in BCC-AGCM2.0 over East Asia[J]. Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, 2022, 39(12): 2 188-2 202.
[16]	Heede U, Fedorov A. Eastern equatorial Pacific warming delayed by aerosols and thermostat response to CO₂ increase[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2021, 11(8): 696-703.
[17]	Duan Y, Wu P, Chen X, et al. Assessing global warming induced changes in summer rainfall variability over Eastern China using the latest hadley centre climate model HadGEM3-GC2[J]. Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, 2018, 35(8): 1 077-1 093.
[18]	Kong Y, Wu Y, Hu X, et al. Uncertainty in projections of the South Asian summer monsoon under global warming by CMIP6 models: Role of tropospheric meridional thermal contrast[J]. Atmospheric and Oceanic Science Letters, 2022, 15(1): 100145.
[19]	Hu X, Liu Y, Kong Y, et al. A quantitative analysis of the source of inter-model spread in Arctic surface warming response to increased CO₂ concentration[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2022, 49(18): e2022GL100034.
[20]	Moon M, Ha K J, Kim D, et al. Rainfall strength and area from landfalling tropical cyclones over the North Indian and western North Pacific oceans under increased CO₂ conditions[J]. Weather and Climate Extremes, 2023, 41(3): 100581.
[21]	翟盘茂, 周佰铨, 陈阳, 等. 气候变化科学方面的几个最新认知[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2021, 17(6): 629-635.
[22]	周天军, 陈梓明, 陈晓龙, 等. IPCC AR6报告解读: 未来的全球气候——基于情景的预估和近期信息[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2021, 17(6): 652-663.
[23]	Li W, Wu Y, Hu X. The processes-based attributes of four major surface melting events over the antarctic ross ice shelf[J]. Advances in Atmospheric Science, 2023, 40(9): 1 662-1 670.
[24]	Fan H, Hu X, Yang S, et al. Process-based analysis of relative contributions to the multi-model warming projection over East Asia[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2021, 56(9-10): 1-19.
[25]	Zhang S, Chen J. Uncertainty in projection of climate extremes: A Comparison of CMIP5 and CMIP6[J]. Journal of Meteorological Research, 2021, 35(5): 646-662.
[26]	Lehner F, Deser C, Maher N, et al. Partitioning climate projection uncertainty with multiple large ensembles and CMIP5/6[J]. Earth System Dynamics, 2020, 11(2): 491-508.
[27]	Fan X, Miao C, Duan Q, et al. The performance of CMIP6 versus CMIP5 in simulating temperature extremes over the global land surface[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmosphere, 2020, 125(18): e2020JD033031.
[28]	Zelinka M D, Myers T A, Mccoy D T, et al. Causes of higher climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2020, 47(1): e2019GL085782.
[29]	Hu X, Fan H, Cai M, et al. A less cloudy picture of the inter-model spread in future global warming projections[J]. Nature Communications, 2020, 11(1): 4472.
[30]	Yang X, Zhou B, Xu Y, et al. CMIP6 evaluation and projection of temperature and precipitation over China[J]. Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, 2021, 38(5): 817-830.
[31]	Wu Y, Yang S, Hu X, et al. Process-based attribution of long-term surface warming over the Tibetan Plateau[J]. International Journal of Climatology, 2020, 40(15): 6 410-6 422.
[32]	陈红. CMIP6模式对欧亚大陆冬季降水模拟能力评估及未来预估[J]. 气象学报, 2020, 78(4): 657-671.
[33]	徐杰. 全球变暖背景下中国海域风速变化的季节性及长期变化趋势分析及风资源评估[J]. 地球科学进展, 2021, 36(8): 868-878.
[34]	Lafferty D C, Sriver R L. Downscaling and bias-correction contribute considerable uncertainty to local climate projections in CMIP6[J]. npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 2023, 6(1): 158.
[35]	Deser C, Phillips A, Bourdette V, et al. Uncertainty in climate change projections: the role of internal variability[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2012, 38(3-4): 527-546.
[36]	Cai M, Lu J. A new framework for isolating individual feedback processes in coupled general circulation climate models. Part Ⅱ: method demonstrations and comparisons[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2009, 32(6): 887-900.
[37]	Lu J, Cai M. A new framework for isolating individual feedback processes in coupled general circulation climate models. Part Ⅰ: formulation[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2009, 32(6): 873-885.