Change specification for CO2 concentration-driven compsets - option 2#1584
Change specification for CO2 concentration-driven compsets - option 2#1584billsacks wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
We have decided to use the CESM2 scheme for this - with _BGC%BDRD or _BGC%BPRP. In this scheme, concentration-driven is implicit, without any _BGC specifier. See ESCOMP/CMEPS#658 for some relevant discussion.
|
Either this OR #1583 should come in; not both! @klindsay28 or @fvitt do you know which is correct? |
|
Also, we may want to change the aliases for these changed compsets; I'll leave that step up to the CAM group. |
|
I'm coming to think that this is the right option (not #1583), but I want confirmation from others (like @klindsay28 or @fvitt ). See also discussion in ESCOMP/CESM#407. I think this PR should be bit-for-bit, which is good because it would be good to verify that the removals of |
|
Based on discussion with @klindsay28, F compsets should probably have no _BGC specifier, so this PR seems like the correct option. I'm therefore taking it out of draft. |
However, we'd welcome confirmation of this from @fvitt or others. |
1 participant
We have decided to use the CESM2 mechanism for CO2 –
_BGC%BDRD,_BGC%BPRPor no_BGCspecifier rather than aCorEat the end of the time period. This PR makes changes towards that.Based on discussions with @klindsay28, it probably makes sense for F compsets to not have a _BGC specifier, in contrast to B compsets. So this PR simply removes the
Cat the end of the time period without adding_BGC%BDRD.Should be coordinated with ESCOMP/CESM#407.
Note that @gold2718 's changes in #1581 and some additional changes (which may be folded into that PR or may come in separately) are needed for co2_cycle to work correctly. However, the changes in this PR don't add any triggering of co2_cycle, so this PR could be brought in before #1581. #1581 will be needed for the proposed changes in ESCOMP/CESM#407.