Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Item

Harmonization of global land use change and management for the period 850–2100 (LUH2) for CMIP6

2020, Hurtt, George C., Chini, Louise, Sahajpal, Ritvik, Frolking, Steve, Bodirsky, Benjamin L., Calvin, Katherine, Doelman, Jonathan C., Fisk, Justin, Fujimori, Shinichiro, Klein Goldewijk, Kees, Hasegawa, Tomoko, Havlik, Peter, Heinimann, Andreas, Humpenöder, Florian, Jungclaus, Johan, Kaplan, Jed O., Kennedy, Jennifer, Krisztin, Tamás, Lawrence, David, Lawrence, Peter, Ma, Lei, Mertz, Ole, Pongratz, Julia, Popp, Alexander, Poulter, Benjamin, Riahi, Keywan, Shevliakova, Elena, Stehfest, Elke, Thornton, Peter, Tubiello, Francesco N., van Vuuren, Detlef P., Zhang, Xin

Human land use activities have resulted in large changes to the biogeochemical and biophysical properties of the Earth's surface, with consequences for climate and other ecosystem services. In the future, land use activities are likely to expand and/or intensify further to meet growing demands for food, fiber, and energy. As part of the World Climate Research Program Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), the international community has developed the next generation of advanced Earth system models (ESMs) to estimate the combined effects of human activities (e.g., land use and fossil fuel emissions) on the carbon–climate system. A new set of historical data based on the History of the Global Environment database (HYDE), and multiple alternative scenarios of the future (2015–2100) from Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) teams, is required as input for these models. With most ESM simulations for CMIP6 now completed, it is important to document the land use patterns used by those simulations. Here we present results from the Land-Use Harmonization 2 (LUH2) project, which smoothly connects updated historical reconstructions of land use with eight new future projections in the format required for ESMs. The harmonization strategy estimates the fractional land use patterns, underlying land use transitions, key agricultural management information, and resulting secondary lands annually, while minimizing the differences between the end of the historical reconstruction and IAM initial conditions and preserving changes depicted by the IAMs in the future. The new approach builds on a similar effort from CMIP5 and is now provided at higher resolution (0.25∘×0.25∘) over a longer time domain (850–2100, with extensions to 2300) with more detail (including multiple crop and pasture types and associated management practices) using more input datasets (including Landsat remote sensing data) and updated algorithms (wood harvest and shifting cultivation); it is assessed via a new diagnostic package. The new LUH2 products contain > 50 times the information content of the datasets used in CMIP5 and are designed to enable new and improved estimates of the combined effects of land use on the global carbon–climate system.

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Item

Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project Phase 1: introduction and evaluation of global-mean temperature response

2020, Nicholls, Zebedee R. J., Meinshausen, Malte, Lewis, Jared, Gieseke, Robert, Dommenget, Dietmar, Dorheim, Kalyn, Fan, Chen-Shuo, Fuglestvedt, Jan S., Gasser, Thomas, Golüke, Ulrich, Goodwin, Philip, Hartin, Corinne, Hope, Austin P., Kriegler, Elmar, Leach, Nicholas J., Marchegiani, Davide, McBride, Laura A., Quilcaille, Yann, Rogelj, Joeri, Salawitch, Ross J., Samset, Bjørn H., Sandstad, Marit, Shiklomanov, Alexey N., Skeie, Ragnhild B., Smith, Christopher J., Smith, Steve, Tanaka, Katsumasa, Tsutsui, Junichi, Xie, Zhiang

Reduced-complexity climate models (RCMs) are critical in the policy and decision making space, and are directly used within multiple Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports to complement the results of more comprehensive Earth system models. To date, evaluation of RCMs has been limited to a few independent studies. Here we introduce a systematic evaluation of RCMs in the form of the Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project (RCMIP). We expect RCMIP will extend over multiple phases, with Phase 1 being the first. In Phase 1, we focus on the RCMs' global-mean temperature responses, comparing them to observations, exploring the extent to which they emulate more complex models and considering how the relationship between temperature and cumulative emissions of CO2 varies across the RCMs. Our work uses experiments which mirror those found in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), which focuses on complex Earth system and atmosphere–ocean general circulation models. Using both scenario-based and idealised experiments, we examine RCMs' global-mean temperature response under a range of forcings. We find that the RCMs can all reproduce the approximately 1 ∘C of warming since pre-industrial times, with varying representations of natural variability, volcanic eruptions and aerosols. We also find that RCMs can emulate the global-mean temperature response of CMIP models to within a root-mean-square error of 0.2 ∘C over a range of experiments. Furthermore, we find that, for the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) and Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP)-based scenario pairs that share the same IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5)-consistent stratospheric-adjusted radiative forcing, the RCMs indicate higher effective radiative forcings for the SSP-based scenarios and correspondingly higher temperatures when run with the same climate settings. In our idealised setup of RCMs with a climate sensitivity of 3 ∘C, the difference for the ssp585–rcp85 pair by 2100 is around 0.23∘C(±0.12 ∘C) due to a difference in effective radiative forcings between the two scenarios. Phase 1 demonstrates the utility of RCMIP's open-source infrastructure, paving the way for further phases of RCMIP to build on the research presented here and deepen our understanding of RCMs.

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Item

The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report WGIII climate assessment of mitigation pathways: from emissions to global temperatures

2022, Kikstra, Jarmo S., Nicholls, Zebedee R. J., Smith, Christopher J., Lewis, Jared, Lamboll, Robin D., Byers, Edward, Sandstad, Marit, Meinshausen, Malte, Gidden, Matthew J., Rogelj, Joeri, Kriegler, Elmar, Peters, Glen P., Fuglestvedt, Jan S., Skeie, Ragnhild B., Samset, Bjørn H., Wienpahl, Laura, van Vuuren, Detlef P., van der Wijst, Kaj-Ivar, Al Khourdajie, Alaa, Forster, Piers M., Reisinger, Andy, Schaeffer, Roberto, Riahi, Keywan

While the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) physical science reports usually assess a handful of future scenarios, the Working Group III contribution on climate mitigation to the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report (AR6 WGIII) assesses hundreds to thousands of future emissions scenarios. A key task in WGIII is to assess the global mean temperature outcomes of these scenarios in a consistent manner, given the challenge that the emissions scenarios from different integrated assessment models (IAMs) come with different sectoral and gas-to-gas coverage and cannot all be assessed consistently by complex Earth system models. In this work, we describe the "climate-assessment"workflow and its methods, including infilling of missing emissions and emissions harmonisation as applied to 1202 mitigation scenarios in AR6 WGIII. We evaluate the global mean temperature projections and effective radiative forcing (ERF) characteristics of climate emulators FaIRv1.6.2 and MAGICCv7.5.3 and use the CICERO simple climate model (CICERO-SCM) for sensitivity analysis. We discuss the implied overshoot severity of the mitigation pathways using overshoot degree years and look at emissions and temperature characteristics of scenarios compatible with one possible interpretation of the Paris Agreement. We find that the lowest class of emissions scenarios that limit global warming to "1.5 ° C (with a probability of greater than 50 %) with no or limited overshoot"includes 97 scenarios for MAGICCv7.5.3 and 203 for FaIRv1.6.2. For the MAGICCv7.5.3 results, "limited overshoot"typically implies exceedance of median temperature projections of up to about 0.1 ° C for up to a few decades before returning to below 1.5 ° C by or before the year 2100. For more than half of the scenarios in this category that comply with three criteria for being "Paris-compatible", including net-zero or net-negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, median temperatures decline by about 0.3-0.4 ° C after peaking at 1.5-1.6 ° C in 2035-2055. We compare the methods applied in AR6 with the methods used for SR1.5 and discuss their implications. This article also introduces a "climate-assessment"Python package which allows for fully reproducing the IPCC AR6 WGIII temperature assessment. This work provides a community tool for assessing the temperature outcomes of emissions pathways and provides a basis for further work such as extending the workflow to include downscaling of climate characteristics to a regional level and calculating impacts.