Is CAM5 standalone equivalent to CESM1.0 FC5?

[weili@psu_edu]

Is there anybody have experience with comparing the standalone CAM5 with CESM1.0 component set FC5 (modern climatological SST and CAM5 physics) result? I recently run two versions of model using same climatological SST data but got quite different result. Any thoughts on this would be very appreciated.

 

[eaton]

There should not be any significant differences between these methods of running the cam5 standalone configuration. I did a quick check of the namelist files generated by the two methods and the only difference I found was that co2vmr was 368.9 ppmv when set up using the CESM scripts (this number is hardcoded in the FC5 compset), but was 367.0 in the namelist produced by the standalone script (the default in that case is coming from the namelist_defaults_cam.xml file).

Note that the cam5 physics in the cesm1.0 release has bugs that are fixed in the recent cesm1.0.3 release.

 

[weili@psu_edu]

Thanks for reply Eaton. It is good to know that there shouldn't be too much difference between the method of running the CAM. I realized that my CAM5 standalone run came from cesm1.0.1 while the cesm F component for me to do the comparison is cesm1.0.2. So I think that difference may be due to the different version of cesm1.0.