The TRAPPIST Habitable Atmosphere Intercomparison (THAI)

The era of atmospheric characterization of terrestrial exoplanets is just around the corner. Modeling prior to observations is crucial in order to predict the observational challenges and to prepare for the data interpretation. This paper presents the report of the TRAPPIST Habitable Atmosphere Intercomparison workshop (2020 September 14–16). A review of the climate models and parameterizations of the atmospheric processes on terrestrial exoplanets, model advancements, and limitations, as well as direction for future model development, was discussed. We hope that this report will be used as a roadmap for future numerical simulations of exoplanet atmospheres and maintaining strong connections to the astronomical community.

The TRAPPIST-1 Habitable Atmosphere Intercomparison (THAI) project was initiated to compare 3D climate models that are commonly used for predicting theoretical climates of habitable zone extrasolar planets. One of the core models studied as part of THAI is ExoCAM, an independently curated exoplanet branch of the National Center for Atmospheric Research Community Earth System Model (CESM), version 1.2.1. ExoCAM has been used for studying atmospheres of terrestrial extrasolar planets around a variety of stars. To accompany the THAI project and provide a primary reference, here we describe ExoCAM and what makes it unique from standard configurations of CESM. Furthermore, we also conduct a series of intramodel sensitivity tests of relevant moist physical tuning parameters while using the THAI protocol as our starting point. A common criticism of 3D climate models used for exoplanet modeling is that cloud and convection routines often contain free parameters that are tuned to the modern Earth, and thus may be a source of uncertainty in evaluating exoplanet climates. Here, we explore sensitivities to numerous configuration and parameter selections, including a recently updated radiation scheme, a different cloud and convection physics package, different cloud and precipitation tuning parameters, and a different sea ice albedo. Improvements to our radiation scheme and the modification of cloud particle sizes have the largest effects on global mean temperatures, with variations up to ∼10 K, highlighting the requirement for accurate radiative transfer and the importance of cloud microphysics for simulating exoplanetary climates. However, for the vast majority of sensitivity tests, climate differences are small. For all cases studied, intramodel differences do not bias general conclusions regarding climate states and habitability.

This paper describes the habitable energy balance model for exoplanet observations (HEXTOR), which is a model for calculating latitudinal temperature profiles on Earth and other rapidly rotating planets. HEXTOR includes a lookup table method for calculating the outgoing infrared radiative flux and the planetary albedo, which provides improvements over other approaches to parameterizing radiative transfer in an energy balance model (EBM). Validation cases are presented for present-day Earth and other Earth-sized planets with aquaplanet and land planet conditions from 0° to 45° obliquity. A tidally locked coordinate system is also implemented in the EBM, which enables calculation of the horizontal temperature profile for planets in synchronous rotation around low-mass stars. This coordinate-transformed model is applied to cases for TRAPPIST-1e as defined by the TRAPPIST Habitable Atmosphere Intercomparison protocol, which demonstrates better agreement with general circulation models than with the latitudinal EBM. Advances in applying EBMs to exoplanets can be made by using general circulation models as a benchmark for tuning as well as by conducting intercomparisons between EBMs with different physical parameterizations.

Using a 3D general circulation model, we demonstrate that a confirmed rocky exoplanet and a primary observational target, TRAPPIST-1e presents an interesting case of climate bistability. We find that the atmospheric circulation on TRAPPIST-1e can exist in two distinct regimes for a 1 bar nitrogen-dominated atmosphere. One is characterized by a single strong equatorial prograde jet and a large day–night temperature difference; the other is characterized by a pair of mid-latitude prograde jets and a relatively small day–night contrast. The circulation regime appears to be highly sensitive to the model setup, including initial and surface boundary conditions, as well as physical parameterizations of convection and cloud radiative effects. We focus on the emergence of the atmospheric circulation during the early stages of simulations and show that the regime bistability is associated with a delicate balance between the zonally asymmetric heating, mean overturning circulation, and mid-latitude baroclinic instability. The relative strength of these processes places the GCM simulations on different branches of the evolution of atmospheric dynamics. The resulting steady states of the two regimes have consistent differences in the amount of water content and clouds, affecting the water absorption bands as well as the continuum level in the transmission spectrum, although they are too small to be detected with current technology. Nevertheless, this regime bistability affects the surface temperature, especially on the night side of the planet, and presents an interesting case for understanding atmospheric dynamics and highlights uncertainty in 3D GCM results, motivating more multimodel studies.

To identify promising exoplanets for atmospheric characterization and to make the best use of observational data, a thorough understanding of their atmospheres is needed. Three-dimensional general circulation models (GCMs) are one of the most comprehensive tools available for this task and will be used to interpret observations of temperate rocky exoplanets. Due to parameterization choices made in GCMs, they can produce different results, even for the same planet. Employing four widely used exoplanetary GCMs—ExoCAM, LMD-G, ROCKE-3D, and the UM—we continue the TRAPPIST-1 Habitable Atmosphere Intercomparison by modeling aquaplanet climates of TRAPPIST-1e with a moist atmosphere dominated by either nitrogen or carbon dioxide. Although the GCMs disagree on the details of the simulated regimes, they all predict a temperate climate with neither of the two cases pushed out of the habitable state. Nevertheless, the intermodel spread in the global mean surface temperature is nonnegligible: 14 K and 24 K in the nitrogen- and carbon dioxide-dominated case, respectively. We find substantial intermodel differences in moist variables, with the smallest amount of clouds in LMD-Generic and the largest in ROCKE-3D. ExoCAM predicts the warmest climate for both cases and thus has the highest water vapor content and the largest amount and variability of cloud condensate. The UM tends to produce colder conditions, especially in the nitrogen-dominated case due to a strong negative cloud radiative effect on the day side of TRAPPIST-1e. Our study highlights various biases of GCMs and emphasizes the importance of not relying solely on one model to understand exoplanet climates.

The TRAPPIST-1 Habitable Atmosphere Intercomparison (THAI) is a community project that aims to quantify how differences in general circulation models (GCMs) could impact the climate prediction for TRAPPIST-1e and, subsequently, its atmospheric characterization in transit. Four GCMs have participated in THAI: ExoCAM, LMD-Generic, ROCKE-3D, and the UM. This paper, focused on the simulated observations, is the third part of a trilogy, following the analysis of two land planet scenarios (Part I) and two aquaplanet scenarios (Part II). Here we show a robust agreement between the simulated spectra and the number of transits estimated to detect the land planet atmospheres. For the cloudy aquaplanet ones, a 5σ detection of CO₂ could be achieved in about 10 transits if the atmosphere contains at least 1 bar of CO₂. That number can vary by 41%–56% depending on the GCM used to predict the terminator profiles, principally due to differences in the cloud deck altitude, with ExoCAM and LMD-G producing higher clouds than ROCKE-3D and UM. Therefore, for the first time, this work provides "GCM uncertainty error bars" of ∼50% that need to be considered in future analyses of transmission spectra. We also analyzed the intertransit spectral variability. Its magnitude differs significantly between the GCMs, but its impact on the transmission spectra is within the measurement uncertainties. THAI has demonstrated the importance of model intercomparison for exoplanets and also paved the way for a larger project to develop an intercomparison meta-framework, namely, the Climates Using Interactive Suites of Intercomparisons Nested for Exoplanet Studies.

With the commissioning of powerful, new-generation telescopes such as the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) and the ground-based Extremely Large Telescopes, the first characterization of a high molecular weight atmosphere around a temperate rocky exoplanet is imminent. Atmospheric simulations and synthetic observables of target exoplanets are essential to prepare and interpret these observations. Here we report the results of the first part of the TRAPPIST-1 Habitable Atmosphere Intercomparison (THAI) project, which compares 3D numerical simulations performed with four state-of-the-art global climate models (ExoCAM, LMD-Generic, ROCKE-3D, Unified Model) for the potentially habitable target TRAPPIST-1e. In this first part, we present the results of dry atmospheric simulations. These simulations serve as a benchmark to test how radiative transfer, subgrid-scale mixing (dry turbulence and convection), and large-scale dynamics impact the climate of TRAPPIST-1e and consequently the transit spectroscopy signature as seen by JWST. To first order, the four models give results in good agreement. The intermodel spread in the global mean surface temperature amounts to 7 K (6 K) for the N₂-dominated (CO₂-dominated) atmosphere. The radiative fluxes are also remarkably similar (intermodel variations less than 5%), from the surface (1 bar) up to atmospheric pressures ∼5 mbar. Moderate differences between the models appear in the atmospheric circulation pattern (winds) and the (stratospheric) thermal structure. These differences arise between the models from (1) large-scale dynamics, because TRAPPIST-1e lies at the tipping point between two different circulation regimes (fast and Rhines rotators) in which the models can be alternatively trapped, and (2) parameterizations used in the upper atmosphere such as numerical damping.

Energy balance models (EBMs), alongside radiative–convective climate models and global climate models (GCMs), are useful tools for simulating planetary climates. Historically, planetary and exoplanetary EBMs have solely been 1D latitudinally dependent models with no longitudinal dependence, until the study of Okuya et al., which focused on simulating synchronously rotating planets. Following the work of Okuya et al., I have designed the first 2D EBM (PlaHab) that can simulate N₂–CO₂–H₂O–H₂ atmospheres of both rapidly and synchronously rotating planets, including Mars, Earth, and exoplanets located within their circumstellar habitable zones. PlaHab includes physics for both water and CO₂ condensation. Regional topography can be incorporated. Here, I have specifically applied PlaHab to investigate the present Earth, early Mars, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Proxima Centauri b, representing examples of habitable (and potentially habitable) worlds in our solar system and beyond. I compare my EBM results against those of other 1D and 3D models, including those of the recent Trappist-1 Habitable Atmosphere comparison project. Overall, the EBM results are consistent with those of other 1D and 3D models, although inconsistencies among all models continue to be related to the treatment of clouds and other known differences between EBMs and GCMs, including heat transport parameterizations. Although 2D EBMs are a relatively new entry in the study of planetary/exoplanetary climates, their ease of use, speed, flexibility, wide applicability, and greater complexity (relative to 1D models) may indicate an ideal combination for the modeling of planetary and exoplanetary atmospheres alike.