3 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- ItemThe GGCMI Phase 2 experiment: Global gridded crop model simulations under uniform changes in CO2, temperature, water, and nitrogen levels (protocol version 1.0)(Katlenburg-Lindau : Copernicus, 2020) Franke, James A.; Müller, Christoph; Elliott, Joshua; Ruane, Alex C.; Jägermeyr, Jonas; Balkovic, Juraj; Ciais, Philippe; Dury, Marie; Falloon, Pete D.; Folberth, Christian; François, Louis; Hank, Tobias; Hoffmann, Munir; Izaurralde, R. Cesar; Jacquemin, Ingrid; Jones, Curtis; Khabarov, Nikolay; Koch, Marian; Li, Michelle; Liu, Wenfeng; Olin, Stefan; Phillips, Meridel; Pugh, Thomas A. M.; Reddy, Ashwan; Wang, Xuhui; Williams, Karina; Zabel, Florian; Moyer, Elisabeth J.Concerns about food security under climate change motivate efforts to better understand future changes in crop yields. Process-based crop models, which represent plant physiological and soil processes, are necessary tools for this purpose since they allow representing future climate and management conditions not sampled in the historical record and new locations to which cultivation may shift. However, process-based crop models differ in many critical details, and their responses to different interacting factors remain only poorly understood. The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) Phase 2 experiment, an activity of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP), is designed to provide a systematic parameter sweep focused on climate change factors and their interaction with overall soil fertility, to allow both evaluating model behavior and emulating model responses in impact assessment tools. In this paper we describe the GGCMI Phase 2 experimental protocol and its simulation data archive. A total of 12 crop models simulate five crops with systematic uniform perturbations of historical climate, varying CO2, temperature, water supply, and applied nitrogen (“CTWN”) for rainfed and irrigated agriculture, and a second set of simulations represents a type of adaptation by allowing the adjustment of growing season length. We present some crop yield results to illustrate general characteristics of the simulations and potential uses of the GGCMI Phase 2 archive. For example, in cases without adaptation, modeled yields show robust decreases to warmer temperatures in almost all regions, with a nonlinear dependence that means yields in warmer baseline locations have greater temperature sensitivity. Inter-model uncertainty is qualitatively similar across all the four input dimensions but is largest in high-latitude regions where crops may be grown in the future.
- ItemDescription and evaluation of the process-based forest model 4C v2.2 at four European forest sites(Katlenburg-Lindau : Copernicus, 2020) Lasch-Born, Petra; Suckow, Felicitas; Reyer, Christopher P. O.; Gutsch, Martin; Kollas, Chris; Badeck, Franz-Werner; Bugmann, Harald K. M.; Grote, Rüdiger; Fürstenau, Cornelia; Lindner, Marcus; Schaber, JörgThe process-based model 4C (FORESEE) has been developed over the past 20 years to study climate impacts on forests and is now freely available as an open-source tool. The objective of this paper is to provide a comprehensive description of this 4C version (v2.2) for scientific users of the model and to present an evaluation of 4C at four different forest sites across Europe. The evaluation focuses on forest growth as well as carbon (net ecosystem exchange, gross primary production), water (actual evapotranspiration, soil water content), and heat fluxes (soil temperature) using data from the PROFOUND database. We applied different evaluation metrics and compared the daily, monthly, and annual variability of observed and simulated values. The ability to reproduce forest growth (stem diameter and biomass) differs from site to site and is best for a pine stand in Germany (Peitz, model efficiency ME=0.98). 4C is able to reproduce soil temperature at different depths in Sorø and Hyytiälä with good accuracy (for all soil depths ME > 0.8). The dynamics in simulating carbon and water fluxes are well captured on daily and monthly timescales (0.51 < ME < 0.983) but less so on an annual timescale (ME < 0). This model–data mismatch is possibly due to the accumulation of errors because of processes that are missing or represented in a very general way in 4C but not with enough specific detail to cover strong, site-specific dependencies such as ground vegetation growth. These processes need to be further elaborated to improve the projections of climate change on forests. We conclude that, despite shortcomings, 4C is widely applicable, reliable, and therefore ready to be released to the scientific community to use and further develop the model.
- ItemThe Zero Emissions Commitment Model Intercomparison Project (ZECMIP) contribution to C4MIP: Quantifying committed climate changes following zero carbon emissions(Katlenburg-Lindau : Copernicus, 2019) Jones, Chris D.; Frölicher, Thomas L.; Koven, Charles; MacDougall, Andrew H.; Matthews, H. Damon; Zickfeld, Kirsten; Rogelj, Joeri; Tokarska, Katarzyna B.; Gillett, Nathan P.; Ilyina, Tatiana; Meinshausen, Malte; Mengis, Nadine; Séférian, Roland; Eby, Michael; Burger, Friedrich A.The amount of additional future temperature change following a complete cessation of CO2 emissions is a measure of the unrealized warming to which we are committed due to CO2 already emitted to the atmosphere. This “zero emissions commitment” (ZEC) is also an important quantity when estimating the remaining carbon budget – a limit on the total amount of CO2 emissions consistent with limiting global mean temperature at a particular level. In the recent IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 ∘C, the carbon budget framework used to calculate the remaining carbon budget for 1.5 ∘C included the assumption that the ZEC due to CO2 emissions is negligible and close to zero. Previous research has shown significant uncertainty even in the sign of the ZEC. To close this knowledge gap, we propose the Zero Emissions Commitment Model Intercomparison Project (ZECMIP), which will quantify the amount of unrealized temperature change that occurs after CO2 emissions cease and investigate the geophysical drivers behind this climate response. Quantitative information on ZEC is a key gap in our knowledge, and one that will not be addressed by currently planned CMIP6 simulations, yet it is crucial for verifying whether carbon budgets need to be adjusted to account for any unrealized temperature change resulting from past CO2 emissions. We request only one top-priority simulation from comprehensive general circulation Earth system models (ESMs) and Earth system models of intermediate complexity (EMICs) – a branch from the 1 % CO2 run with CO2 emissions set to zero at the point of 1000 PgC of total CO2 emissions in the simulation – with the possibility for additional simulations, if resources allow. ZECMIP is part of CMIP6, under joint sponsorship by C4MIP and CDRMIP, with associated experiment names to enable data submissions to the Earth System Grid Federation. All data will be published and made freely available.