Why Do CO2 Quadrupling Simulations Warm More Than Twice as Much as CO2 Doubling Simulations in CMIP6?

Abstract

AbstractWe compare abrupt CO2‐quadrupling (abrupt‐4xCO2) and ‐doubling (abrupt‐2xCO2) simulations across 10 CMIP6 models. Two models (CESM2 and MRI‐ESM2‐0) warm substantially more than twice as much under abrupt‐4xCO2 than abrupt‐2xCO2, which cannot be explained by the non‐logarithmic scaling of CO2 forcing. Using an energy balance model, we show that increased warming rates within these two models are driven by both less‐negative radiative feedbacks and smaller global effective heat capacity under abrupt‐4xCO2. These differences are caused by a decrease in low cloud cover and shallower ocean heat storage, respectively; both are linked to smaller fractional declines in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) under abrupt‐4xCO2 (relative to abrupt‐2xCO2). On a global scale, higher climate sensitivity under larger forcing can be explained by a feedback‐temperature dependence; however, we find that forcing‐dependent spatial warming patterns due to AMOC decline are an important physical mechanism which reduces warming in a way that is not captured by a global‐mean framework.