Search Results
Changes in crop yields and their variability at different levels of global warming
An assessment of climate change impacts at different levels of global warming is crucial to inform the policy discussion about mitigation targets, as well as for the economic evaluation of climate change impacts. Integrated assessment models often use global mean temperature change (ΔGMT) as a sole measure of climate change and, therefore, need to describe impacts as a function of ΔGMT. There is already a well-established framework for the scalability of regional temperature and precipitation changes with ΔGMT. It is less clear to what extent more complex biological or physiological impacts such as crop yield changes can also be described in terms of ΔGMT, even though such impacts may often be more directly relevant for human livelihoods than changes in the physical climate. Here we show that crop yield projections can indeed be described in terms of ΔGMT to a large extent, allowing for a fast estimation of crop yield changes for emissions scenarios not originally covered by climate and crop model projections. We use an ensemble of global gridded crop model simulations for the four major staple crops to show that the scenario dependence is a minor component of the overall variance of projected yield changes at different levels of ΔGMT. In contrast, the variance is dominated by the spread across crop models. Varying CO2 concentrations are shown to explain only a minor component of crop yield variability at different levels of global warming. In addition, we find that the variability in crop yields is expected to increase with increasing warming in many world regions. We provide, for each crop model, geographical patterns of mean yield changes that allow for a simplified description of yield changes under arbitrary pathways of global mean temperature and CO2 changes, without the need for additional climate and crop model simulations.
The biosphere under potential Paris outcomes
Rapid economic and population growth over the last centuries have started to push the Earth out of its Holocene state into the Anthropocene. In this new era, ecosystems across the globe face mounting dual pressure from human land use change (LUC) and climate change (CC). With the Paris Agreement, the international community has committed to holding global warming below 2°C above preindustrial levels, yet current pledges by countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions appear insufficient to achieve that goal. At the same time, the sustainable development goals strive to reduce inequalities between countries and provide sufficient food, feed, and clean energy to a growing world population likely to reach more than 9 billion by 2050. Here, we present a macro‐scale analysis of the projected impacts of both CC and LUC on the terrestrial biosphere over the 21st century using the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) to illustrate possible trajectories following the Paris Agreement. We find that CC may cause major impacts in landscapes covering between 16% and 65% of the global ice‐free land surface by the end of the century, depending on the success or failure of achieving the Paris goal. Accounting for LUC impacts in addition, this number increases to 38%–80%. Thus, CC will likely replace LUC as the major driver of ecosystem change unless global warming can be limited to well below 2°C. We also find a substantial risk that impacts of agricultural expansion may offset some of the benefits of ambitious climate protection for ecosystems.
Risks for the global freshwater system at 1.5 °c and 2 °c global warming
To support implementation of the Paris Agreement, the new HAPPI ensemble of 20 bias-corrected simulations of four climate models was used to drive two global hydrological models, WaterGAP and LPJmL, for assessing freshwater-related hazards and risks in worlds approximately 1.5 °C and 2 °C warmer than pre-industrial. Quasi-stationary HAPPI simulations are better suited than transient CMIP-like simulations for assessing hazards at the two targeted long-term global warming (GW) levels. We analyzed seven hydrological hazard indicators that characterize freshwater-related hazards for humans, freshwater biota and vegetation. Using a strict definition for significant differences, we identified for all but one indicator that areas with either significantly wetter or drier conditions (calculated as percent changes from 2006–2015) are smaller in the 1.5 °C world. For example, 7 day high flow is projected to increase significantly on 11% and 21% of the global land area at 1.5 °C and 2 °C, respectively. However, differences between hydrological hazards at the two GW levels are significant on less than 12% of the area. GW affects a larger area and more people by increases—rather than by decreases—of mean annual and 1-in-10 dry year streamflow, 7 day high flow, and groundwater recharge. The opposite is true for 7 day low flow, maximum snow storage, and soil moisture in the driest month of the growing period. Mean annual streamflow shows the lowest projected percent changes of all indicators. Among country groups, low income countries and lower middle income countries are most affected by decreased low flows and increased high flows, respectively, while high income countries are least affected by such changes. The incremental impact between 1.5 °C and 2 °C on high flows would be felt most by low income and lower middle income countries, the effect on soil moisture and low flows most by high income countries.