Home
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/the-curious-wavefunction/2013/04/18/climate-change-models-fail-to-accurately-simulate-droughts/
This is in fact a problem that has plagued computer models of climate since their very inception in the 1950s. The early general circulation models (GCMs) included the motion of the atmosphere and factors like wind speed, temperature and pressure. Over time these atmospheric circulation models became quite sophisticated,account for radiation transport and the opacity of various gases. The strengths and weakness of these models largely carried over into modern day climate modeling.
In general the models are quite good at simulating the motions of the atmosphere but are still inadequate in accounting for the complex processes in the biosphere,including the behavior of the soil,forests,rivers,mountains and the various plants and animals that inhabit these environments. This discrepancy between accurate atmospheric simulation and lackluster biospheric simulation may be responsible for many of the defects in climate modeling. And as the researchers say,the models are still not great at capturing fine-grained details of clouds and their influence on water. It’s striking to me that both molecular models and climate models struggle in modeling that simplest and most ubiquitous of substances –water. No wonder they have a hard time predicting droughts and precipitation. Finally,the lack of difference in the results when the key factors are held constant and when they are allowed to vary points to an independent and possibly unknown set of factors that are influencing model results.
This is in fact a problem that has plagued computer models of climate since their very inception in the 1950s. The early general circulation models (GCMs) included the motion of the atmosphere and factors like wind speed, temperature and pressure. Over time these atmospheric circulation models became quite sophisticated,account for radiation transport and the opacity of various gases. The strengths and weakness of these models largely carried over into modern day climate modeling.
In general the models are quite good at simulating the motions of the atmosphere but are still inadequate in accounting for the complex processes in the biosphere,including the behavior of the soil,forests,rivers,mountains and the various plants and animals that inhabit these environments. This discrepancy between accurate atmospheric simulation and lackluster biospheric simulation may be responsible for many of the defects in climate modeling. And as the researchers say,the models are still not great at capturing fine-grained details of clouds and their influence on water. It’s striking to me that both molecular models and climate models struggle in modeling that simplest and most ubiquitous of substances –water. No wonder they have a hard time predicting droughts and precipitation. Finally,the lack of difference in the results when the key factors are held constant and when they are allowed to vary points to an independent and possibly unknown set of factors that are influencing model results.
