Overview of MIPs that have applied for CMIP6 Endorsement Applications follow the template available on the CMIP panel website at http://www.wcrp‐ climate.org/index.php/wgcm‐cmip/about‐cmip Date: 8 April 2014 Please send any feedback to these applications to the CMIP panel chair ([email protected]) or directly contact the individual co‐chairs for questions on specific MIPs Short name of MIP Long name of MIP 1 AerChemMIP Aerosols and Chemistry Model Intercomparison Project 2 C4MIP Coupled Climate Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison Project 3 CFMIP Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project 4 DAMIP Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project 5 DCPP Decadal Climate Prediction Project 6 FAFMIP Flux‐Anomaly‐Forced Model Intercomparison Project 7 GeoMIP Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project 8 GMMIP Global Monsoons Model Intercomparison Project 9 HighResMIP High Resolution Model Intercomparison Project 10 ISMIP6 Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 11 LS3MIP Land Surface, Snow and Soil Moisture 12 LUMIP Land‐Use Model Intercomparison Project 13 OMIP Ocean Model Intercomparison Project 14 PDRMIP Precipitation Driver and Response Model Intercomparison Project 15 PMIP Palaeoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project 16 RFMIP Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project 17 ScenarioMIP Scenario Model Intercomparison Project 18 SolarMIP Solar Model Intercomparison Project 19 VolMIP Volcanic Forcings Model Intercomparison Project 20 CORDEX* Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment 21 DynVar* Dynamics and Variability of the Stratosphere‐Troposphere System 22 SIMIP* Sea‐Ice Model Intercomparison Project 23 VIAAB* VIA Advisory Board for CMIP6 *Diagnostic MIP ENSOMIP, GDDEX withdrawn OCMIP6 merged with OMIP Application for CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs Please return to CMIP Panel Chair Veronika Eyring (email: [email protected]) Date: 10 November 2014 The recently proposed, revised CMIP structure (see information on the CMIP Panel website at http://www.wcrp-climate.org/index.php/wgcm-cmip/about-cmip) provides for a small set of experiments to be routinely performed by modeling groups whenever they develop a new model version. The output from these so-called ongoing CMIP Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima (DECK) experiments and the CMIP6 Historical Simulation will be distributed for community use via the ESGF infrastructure. Other Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs) will build on the CMIP DECK experiments and the CMIP6 Historical Simulation and augment them to address a broad range of scientific questions. Additionally proposed MIP experiments together with the CMIP DECK experiments and the CMIP6 Historical Simulation will constitute the suite of simulations for the next phase of CMIP. MIPs are invited to request endorsement for the next phase of CMIP (i.e., CMIP6). Applications from MIPs requesting status as a CMIP6-Endorsed MIP should be sent to the CMIP Panel Chair. The current set of MIP proposals is now complete and will be revised on the agreed timeline. We will review any additional proposals in a year from now at the next WGCM meeting in October 2015. A MIP may propose that a subset or even all of their experiments be included as part of the suite of simulations constituting CMIP6. The CMIP Panel will, together with the WGCM co-chairs, decide whether a MIP and its experiments meet the criteria for endorsement for CMIP6. Note that it is expected that all additional experiments proposed for CMIP6 will be scientifically analyzed and exploited by the MIP. CMIP6-Endsored MIPs can make full use of the ESGF infrastructure. In order to minimize the burden imposed on modeling groups wishing to participate, the MIPs seeking to be part of CMIP Phase X must agree to comply with the CMIP standards in terms of experimental design, data format and documentation. In general the WGCM encourages adhering to the standards in place for CMIP. The main criteria for MIPs to be endorsed for CMIP6 are 1. The MIP and its experiments address at least one of the key science questions of CMIP6. 2. The MIP demonstrates connectivity to the DECK experiments and the CMIP6 Historical Simulation. 3. The MIP adopts the CMIP modeling infrastructure standards and conventions. 4. All experiments are tiered, well-defined, and useful in a multi-model context and don’t overlap with other CMIP6 experiments. 5. Unless a Tier 1 experiment differs only slightly from another well-established experiment, it must already have been performed by more than one modeling group. 6. A sufficient number of modelling centers (~8) are committed to performing all of the MIP‘s Tier 1 experiments and providing all the requested diagnostics needed to answer at least one of its science questions. 7. The MIP presents an analysis plan describing how it will use all proposed experiments, any relevant observations, and specially requested model output to evaluate the models and address its science questions. 8. The MIP has completed the MIP template questionnaire. 9. The MIP contributes a paper on its experimental design to the CMIP6 Special Issue. 10. The MIP considers reporting on the results by co-authoring a paper with the modelling groups. AerChemMIP (Aerosols and Chemistry MIP) Application for CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs Date: 8 April 2015 Co-chairs of MIP William Collins (UK) ([email protected]) Jean‐François Lamarque (US) ([email protected]) Michael Schulz (Norway) ([email protected]) Members of the Scientific Steering Committee Olivier Boucher (France) ([email protected]) Veronika Eyring (Germany) ([email protected]) Arlene Fiore (US) ([email protected]) Michaela Hegglin (UK) ([email protected]) Gunnar Myhre (Norway) ([email protected]) Michael Prather (US) ([email protected]) Drew Shindell (US) ([email protected]) Steve Smith (US) ([email protected]) Darryn Waugh (US) ([email protected]) Goal of the MIP Past climate change has been forced by a wide range of chemically reactive gases, aerosols, and well mixed greenhouse gases (WMGHGs), in addition to CO2. Scientific questions and uncertainties regarding chemistry‐climate interactions range from regional scales (e.g., tropospheric ozone and aerosols interacting with regional meteorology), to long‐range connections (e.g., hemispheric transport of air pollution, the impacts of lower stratospheric ozone and temperatures on surface climate), to global integration (e.g., the lifetimes of CH4 and N2O). AerChemMIP proposes to contribute to CMIP6 through the following: 1) diagnose forcings 1 and feedbacks involving NTCF s, (namely tropospheric aerosols, tropospheric O3 precursors, and CH4) and the chemically reactive WMGHGs (e.g., N2O, also CH4, and some halocarbons** including impacts on stratospheric O3), 2) document and understand past and future changes in the chemical composition of the atmosphere, and 3) estimate the global‐to‐regional climate response from these changes. 1 Near Term Climate Forcers The AerChemMIP Tier 1 simulations focus primarily on understanding atmospheric composition changes (from NTCFs and other chemically‐active anthropogenic gases) and their impact on climate. We have devised a series of experiments that contrast the forcing of various NTCFs with that of WMGHGs in historical and future climate change. In addition, the proposed chemistry‐climate simulations will enable diagnosis of changes in regional air quality (AQ) through its coupling to large‐scale changes in O3‐CH4‐PM2.5. We will work in collaboration with RFMIP and DAMIP to provide a comprehensive analysis of ERF and the regionally‐resolved climate forcing signature from tropospheric NTCFs. For some of the specifically attributable climate forcings, in particular those at the 10s of mW m‐2 level, the actual climate change will be difficult to detect in a transient simulation or even a time slice of several decades. AerChemMIP is a joint, consolidated effort for CMIP6 from two international communities ‐‐ Aerosol Comparisons between Observations and Models (AeroCom, http://aerocom.met.no/Welcome.html) and the IGAC/SPARC Chemistry‐Climate Model Initiative (CCMI, http://www.met.reading.ac.uk/ccmi/). Experiments suggested for CCMI Phase 2 [Eyring et al., 2013b], which are traditionally run using chemistry‐climate models (CCMs) with mostly prescribed sea surface temperatures and sea ice concentrations, complement this set of AerChemMIP/CMIP6 experiments. Further experiments in AeroCom phase III aim to understand sensitivity of aerosol forcing to aerosol formation and loss processes. **We do not specifically consider the very long‐lived F‐gases (SF6, PFCs, and some HFCs) as their abundance is not affected by chemistry on a century time scale.** Overview Aerosols and ozone were identified in IPCC AR5 (Myhre et al., 2013) as the main sources of uncertainty in the radiative forcing since pre‐industrial times. Uncertainties in projecting the chemically reactive WMGHGs as well as future air quality from global changes were also identified in AR5 [Kirtman et al., 2013]. In addition to changing anthropogenic emissions evaluated in AR5, natural aerosols originating from biogenic sources, dust or sea‐salt are a primary contributor to the uncertainty in current forcing (Carslaw et al. 2013). Due to the nonlinear response of clouds to the background level of aerosols, the response of the climate system to human perturbations will depend critically on the natural aerosol background (Carlton et al., 2010). Beyond aerosols, the biogeochemistry of ecosystems provides large