Filters

2013 - 20182

More filters

20192
Reset filters

Settings

Author: Müller, C. × DDC: 500 ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Can bioenergy cropping compensate high carbon emissions from large-scale deforestation of high latitudes?
    (München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2013) Dass, P.; Müller, C.; Brovkin, V.; Cramer, W.
    Numerous studies have concluded that deforestation of the high latitudes result in a global cooling. This is mainly because of the increased albedo of deforested land which dominates over other biogeophysical and biogeochemical mechanisms in the energy balance. This dominance, however, may be due to an underestimation of the biogeochemical response, as carbon emissions are typically at or below the lower end of estimates. Here, we use the dynamic global vegetation model LPJmL for a better estimate of the carbon cycle under such large-scale deforestation. These studies are purely theoretical in order to understand the role of vegetation in the energy balance and the earth system. They must not be mistaken as possible mitigation options, because of the devastating effects on pristine ecosystems. For realistic assumptions of land suitability, the total emissions computed in this study are higher than that of previous studies assessing the effects of boreal deforestation. The warming due to biogeochemical effects ranges from 0.12 to 0.32 °C, depending on the climate sensitivity. Using LPJmL to assess the mitigation potential of bioenergy plantations in the suitable areas of the deforested region, we find that the global biophysical bioenergy potential is 68.1 ± 5.6 EJ yr−1 of primary energy at the end of the 21st century in the most plausible scenario. The avoided combustion of fossil fuels over the time frame of this experiment would lead to further cooling. However, since the carbon debt caused by the cumulative emissions is not repaid by the end of the 21st century, the global temperatures would increase by 0.04 to 0.11 °C. The carbon dynamics in the high latitudes especially with respect to permafrost dynamics and long-term carbon losses, require additional attention in the role for the Earth's carbon and energy budget.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Sources of uncertainty in hydrological climate impact assessment: A cross-scale study
    (Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2018) Hattermann, F.F.; Vetter, T.; Breuer, L.; Su, Buda; Daggupati, P.; Donnelly, C.; Fekete, B.; Flörke, F.; Gosling, S.N.; Hoffmann, P.; Liersch, S.; Masaki, Y.; Motovilov, Y.; Müller, C.; Samaniego, L.; Stacke, T.; Wada, Y.; Yang, T.; Krysnaova, V.
    Climate change impacts on water availability and hydrological extremes are major concerns as regards the Sustainable Development Goals. Impacts on hydrology are normally investigated as part of a modelling chain, in which climate projections from multiple climate models are used as inputs to multiple impact models, under different greenhouse gas emissions scenarios, which result in different amounts of global temperature rise. While the goal is generally to investigate the relevance of changes in climate for the water cycle, water resources or hydrological extremes, it is often the case that variations in other components of the model chain obscure the effect of climate scenario variation. This is particularly important when assessing the impacts of relatively lower magnitudes of global warming, such as those associated with the aspirational goals of the Paris Agreement. In our study, we use ANOVA (analyses of variance) to allocate and quantify the main sources of uncertainty in the hydrological impact modelling chain. In turn we determine the statistical significance of different sources of uncertainty. We achieve this by using a set of five climate models and up to 13 hydrological models, for nine large scale river basins across the globe, under four emissions scenarios. The impact variable we consider in our analysis is daily river discharge. We analyze overall water availability and flow regime, including seasonality, high flows and low flows. Scaling effects are investigated by separately looking at discharge generated by global and regional hydrological models respectively. Finally, we compare our results with other recently published studies. We find that small differences in global temperature rise associated with some emissions scenarios have mostly significant impacts on river discharge—however, climate model related uncertainty is so large that it obscures the sensitivity of the hydrological system.