8 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 8 of 8
- ItemThe millennial atmospheric lifetime of anthropogenic CO2(Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer, 2008) Archer, D.; Brovkin, V.The notion is pervasive in the climate science community and in the public at large that the climate impacts of fossil fuel CO2 release will only persist for a few centuries. This conclusion has no basis in theory or models of the atmosphere/ocean carbon cycle, which we review here. The largest fraction of the CO2 recovery will take place on time scales of centuries, as CO2 invades the ocean, but a significant fraction of the fossil fuel CO2, ranging in published models in the literature from 20-60%, remains airborne for a thousand years or longer. Ultimate recovery takes place on time scales of hundreds of thousands of years, a geologic longevity typically associated in public perceptions with nuclear waste. The glacial/interglacial climate cycles demonstrate that ice sheets and sea level respond dramatically to millennial-timescale changes in climate forcing. There are also potential positive feedbacks in the carbon cycle, including methane hydrates in the ocean, and peat frozen in permafrost, that are most sensitive to the long tail of the fossil fuel CO2 in the atmosphere. © 2008 The Author(s).
- ItemClimate impacts on human livelihoods: Where uncertainty matters in projections of water availability(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2014) Lissner, T.K.; Reusser, D.E.; Schewe, J.; Lakes, T.; Kropp, J.P.Climate change will have adverse impacts on many different sectors of society, with manifold consequences for human livelihoods and well-being. However, a systematic method to quantify human well-being and livelihoods across sectors is so far unavailable, making it difficult to determine the extent of such impacts. Climate impact analyses are often limited to individual sectors (e.g. food or water) and employ sector-specific target measures, while systematic linkages to general livelihood conditions remain unexplored. Further, recent multi-model assessments have shown that uncertainties in projections of climate impacts deriving from climate and impact models, as well as greenhouse gas scenarios, are substantial, posing an additional challenge in linking climate impacts with livelihood conditions. This article first presents a methodology to consistently measure what is referred to here as AHEAD (Adequate Human livelihood conditions for wEll-being And Development). Based on a trans-disciplinary sample of concepts addressing human well-being and livelihoods, the approach measures the adequacy of conditions of 16 elements. We implement the method at global scale, using results from the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP) to show how changes in water availability affect the fulfilment of AHEAD at national resolution. In addition, AHEAD allows for the uncertainty of climate and impact model projections to be identified and differentiated. We show how the approach can help to put the substantial inter-model spread into the context of country-specific livelihood conditions by differentiating where the uncertainty about water scarcity is relevant with regard to livelihood conditions – and where it is not. The results indicate that livelihood conditions are compromised by water scarcity in 34 countries. However, more often, AHEAD fulfilment is limited through other elements. The analysis shows that the water-specific uncertainty ranges of the model output are outside relevant thresholds for AHEAD for 65 out of 111 countries, and therefore do not contribute to the overall uncertainty about climate change impacts on livelihoods. In 46 of the countries in the analysis, water-specific uncertainty is relevant to AHEAD. The AHEAD method presented here, together with first results, forms an important step towards making scientific results more applicable for policy decisions.
- ItemClimate impact research: Beyond patchwork(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2014) Huber, V.; Schellnhuber, H.J.; Arnell, N.W.; Frieler, K.; Gerten, D.; Haddeland, I.; Kabat, P.; Lotze-Campen, H.; Lucht, W.; Parry, M.; Piontek, F.; Rosenzweig, C.; Schewe, J.; Warszawski, L.Despite significant progress in climate impact research, the narratives that science can presently piece together of a 2, 3, 4, or 5 °C warmer world remain fragmentary. Here we briefly review past undertakings to characterise comprehensively and quantify climate impacts based on multi-model approaches. We then report on the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP), a community-driven effort to compare impact models across sectors and scales systematically, and to quantify the uncertainties along the chain from greenhouse gas emissions and climate input data to the modelling of climate impacts themselves. We show how ISI-MIP and similar efforts can substantially advance the science relevant to impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, and we outline the steps that need to be taken in order to make the most of the available modelling tools. We discuss pertinent limitations of these methods and how they could be tackled. We argue that it is time to consolidate the current patchwork of impact knowledge through integrated cross-sectoral assessments, and that the climate impact community is now in a favourable position to do so.
- ItemThe role of methane in future climate strategies: mitigation potentials and climate impacts(Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 2019) Harmsen, Mathijs; Mathijs, Detlef P.; Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon; Chateau, Jean; Durand-Lasserve, Olivier; Drouet, Laurent; Fricko, Oliver; Fujimori, Shinichiro; Gernaat, David E.H.J.; Hanaoka, Tatsuya; Hilaire, Jérôme; Keramidas, Kimon; Luderer, Gunnar; Moura, Maria Cecilia P.; Sano, Fuminori; Smith, Steven J.; Wada, KenichiThis study examines model-specific assumptions and projections of methane (CH4) emissions in deep mitigation scenarios generated by integrated assessment models (IAMs). For this, scenarios of nine models are compared in terms of sectoral and regional CH4 emission reduction strategies, as well as resulting climate impacts. The models’ projected reduction potentials are compared to sector and technology-specific reduction potentials found in literature. Significant cost-effective and non-climate policy related reductions are projected in the reference case (10–36% compared to a “frozen emission factor” scenario in 2100). Still, compared to 2010, CH4 emissions are expected to rise steadily by 9–72% (up to 412 to 654 Mt CH4/year). Ambitious CO2 reduction measures could by themselves lead to a reduction of CH4 emissions due to a reduction of fossil fuels (22–48% compared to the reference case in 2100). However, direct CH4 mitigation is crucial and more effective in bringing down CH4 (50–74% compared to the reference case). Given the limited reduction potential, agriculture CH4 emissions are projected to constitute an increasingly larger share of total anthropogenic CH4 emissions in mitigation scenarios. Enteric fermentation in ruminants is in that respect by far the largest mitigation bottleneck later in the century with a projected 40–78% of total remaining CH4 emissions in 2100 in a strong (2 °C) climate policy case. © 2019, The Author(s).
- ItemThe impact of climate conditions on economic production. Evidence from a global panel of regions(Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2020) Kalkuhl, Matthias; Wenz, LeonieWe present a novel data set of subnational economic output, Gross Regional Product (GRP), for more than 1500 regions in 77 countries that allows us to empirically estimate historic climate impacts at different time scales. Employing annual panel models, long-difference regressions and cross-sectional regressions, we identify effects on productivity levels and productivity growth. We do not find evidence for permanent growth rate impacts but we find robust evidence that temperature affects productivity levels considerably. An increase in global mean surface temperature by about 3.5°C until the end of the century would reduce global output by 7–14% in 2100, with even higher damages in tropical and poor regions. Updating the DICE damage function with our estimates suggests that the social cost of carbon from temperature-induced productivity losses is on the order of 73–142$/tCO2 in 2020, rising to 92–181$/tCO2 in 2030. These numbers exclude non-market damages and damages from extreme weather events or sea-level rise. © 2020 The Authors
- ItemPresentation of uncertainties on web platforms for climate change information(Amsterdam : Elsevier B.V., 2011) Reusser, D.E.; Wrobel, M.; Nocke, T.; Sterzel, T.; Förster, H.; Kropp, J.P.Adaptation to climate change is gaining attention and is very challenging because it requires action at a local scale in response to global problems. At the same time, spatial and temporal uncertainty about climate impacts and effects of adaptation projects is large. Data on climate impacts and adaptation is collected and presented in web-based platforms such as ci:grasp, which is unique in its structuredness and by explicitly linking adaptation projects to the addressed climate impacts. The challenge to find an adequate and readable representation of uncertainty in this context is large and research is just in the initial phase to provide solutions to the problem. Our goal is to present the structure required to address spatial and temporal uncertainty within ci:grasp. We compare existing concepts and representations for uncertainty communication with current practices on web-based platforms. From our review we derive an uncertainty framework for climate information going beyond what is currently present in the web. We make use of a multi-step approach in communicating the uncertainty and a typology of uncertainty distinguishing between epistemic, natural stochastic, and human reflexive uncertainty. While our suggestions are a step forward, much remains to be done.
- ItemSozialwissenschaftliche Klimaforschung: Mehr Visionen wagen!(München : Oekom - Gesellschaft fuer Oekologische Kommunikation mbH, 2013) Gerten, D.[No abstract available]
- ItemOne simulation, different conclusions—the baseline period makes the difference!(Bristol : IOP Publ., 2020) Liersch, S.; Drews, M.; Pilz, T.; Salack, S.; Sietz, D.; Aich, V.; Larsen, M.A.D; Gädeke, A.; Halsnæ s, K.; Thiery, W.; Huang, S.; Lobanova, A.; Koch, H.; Hattermann, F.F.The choice of the baseline period, intentionally chosen or not, as a reference for assessing future changes of any projected variable can play an important role for the resulting statement. In regional climate impact studies, well-established or arbitrarily chosen baselines are often used without being questioned. Here we investigated the effects of different baseline periods on the interpretation of discharge simulations from eight river basins in the period 1960–2099. The simulations were forced by four bias-adjusted and downscaled Global Climate Modelsunder two radiative forcing scenarios (RCP 2.6 and RCP 8.5). To systematically evaluate how far the choice of different baselines impacts the simulation results, we developed a similarity index that compares two time series of projected changes. The results show that 25% of the analyzed simulations are sensitive to the choice of the baseline period under RCP 2.6 and 32% under RCP 8.5. In extreme cases, change signals of two time series show opposite trends. This has serious consequences for key messages drawn from a basin-scale climate impact study. To address this problem, an algorithm was developed to identify flexible baseline periods for each simulation individually, which better represent the statistical properties of a given historical period.