Is 1.5 °C of global warming inevitable and if so, when?

Author(s):  
Sebastian Milinski ◽  
Erich Fischer ◽  
Piers Forster ◽  
John C. Fyfe ◽  
June-Yi Lee ◽  
...  

<p>The likelihood of exceeding 1.5 °C of global warming relative to preindustrial depends on the warming observed so far, anthropogenic warming that may occur in the future, and the degree to which internal variability will either temporarily amplify or attenuate future anthropogenic warming.  Here, we introduce a new framework that estimates the likelihood of exceeding 1.5 °C of global warming wherein uncertainties in each one of these factors is explicitly accounted for.</p><p>In this new framework, we estimate the historical warming, and its uncertainty, from preindustrial to present using the recently-minted HadCRUT5 dataset. Future anthropogenic warming is estimated using an energy balance model tuned to an assessed range of climate sensitivity and applied to each of the core emissions scenarios (i.e. SSPs) underlying the Sixth Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). Finally, we estimate the influence of internal variability using a large ensemble of initial condition simulations. On this basis, we find that the largest uncertainty in estimates of the likelihood of exceeding 1.5°C of global warming is due to model-to-model differences in estimates of future anthropogenic warming, followed by historical warming uncertainty, and then uncertainty due to internal variability.</p><p>Based on our analysis, we find that the earliest time for crossing 1.5 °C of global warming, here defined as the 5% likelihood, is approximately emissions-scenario independent. We define the 1.5 °C threshold without any overshoot: if a time series warms by more than 1.5 °C during any 20-year period before 2100, it is counted as having crossed 1.5 °C. In each considered scenario except SSP5-8.5, the 20-year average period that crosses the 1.5 °C threshold with a 5% likelihood is 2013 to 2032. On the other hand, the 50% likelihood does depend on the scenario, with the SSP5-8.5 crossing occurring in 2018 to 2037 and SSP1-1.9 crossing in 2022 to 2041. All scenarios except SSP1-1.9 have a likelihood close to 100% to cross 1.5 °C global warming before 2100. Even in SSP1-1.9, the scenario with the strongest emission reductions, there is a 71% likelihood to cross 1.5 °C by the end of this century. This implies that even in SSP1-1.9, the world may stay below 1.5 °C only if both climate sensitivity and historical warming are near the lower end of their respective distributions.</p><p>These estimates, with their associated uncertainties, may have major implications for policy decisions.</p>

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (16) ◽  
pp. 9591-9618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Smith ◽  
Ryan J. Kramer ◽  
Gunnar Myhre ◽  
Kari Alterskjær ◽  
William Collins ◽  
...  

Abstract. The effective radiative forcing, which includes the instantaneous forcing plus adjustments from the atmosphere and surface, has emerged as the key metric of evaluating human and natural influence on the climate. We evaluate effective radiative forcing and adjustments in 17 contemporary climate models that are participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) and have contributed to the Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (RFMIP). Present-day (2014) global-mean anthropogenic forcing relative to pre-industrial (1850) levels from climate models stands at 2.00 (±0.23) W m−2, comprised of 1.81 (±0.09) W m−2 from CO2, 1.08 (± 0.21) W m−2 from other well-mixed greenhouse gases, −1.01 (± 0.23) W m−2 from aerosols and −0.09 (±0.13) W m−2 from land use change. Quoted uncertainties are 1 standard deviation across model best estimates, and 90 % confidence in the reported forcings, due to internal variability, is typically within 0.1 W m−2. The majority of the remaining 0.21 W m−2 is likely to be from ozone. In most cases, the largest contributors to the spread in effective radiative forcing (ERF) is from the instantaneous radiative forcing (IRF) and from cloud responses, particularly aerosol–cloud interactions to aerosol forcing. As determined in previous studies, cancellation of tropospheric and surface adjustments means that the stratospherically adjusted radiative forcing is approximately equal to ERF for greenhouse gas forcing but not for aerosols, and consequentially, not for the anthropogenic total. The spread of aerosol forcing ranges from −0.63 to −1.37 W m−2, exhibiting a less negative mean and narrower range compared to 10 CMIP5 models. The spread in 4×CO2 forcing has also narrowed in CMIP6 compared to 13 CMIP5 models. Aerosol forcing is uncorrelated with climate sensitivity. Therefore, there is no evidence to suggest that the increasing spread in climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models, particularly related to high-sensitivity models, is a consequence of a stronger negative present-day aerosol forcing and little evidence that modelling groups are systematically tuning climate sensitivity or aerosol forcing to recreate observed historical warming.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Nowicki ◽  
Antony J. Payne ◽  
Heiko Goelzer ◽  
Helene Seroussi ◽  
William H. Lipscomb ◽  
...  

Abstract. Projection of the contribution of ice sheets to sea-level change as part of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project – phase 6 (CMIP6) takes the form of simulations from coupled ice-sheet-climate models and standalone ice sheet models, overseen by the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). This paper describes the experimental setup for process-based sea-level change projections to be performed with standalone Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet models in the context of ISMIP6. The ISMIP6 protocol relies on a suite of polar atmospheric and oceanic CMIP-based forcing for ice sheet models, in order to explore the uncertainty in projected sea-level change due to future emissions scenarios, CMIP models, ice sheet models, and parameterizations for ice-ocean interactions. We describe here the approach taken for defining the suite of ISMIP6 standalone ice sheet simulations, document the experimental framework and implementation, as well as present an overview of the ISMIP6 forcing to be used by participating ice sheet modeling groups.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
June-Yi Lee ◽  
Kyung-Sook Yun ◽  
Arjun Babu ◽  
Young-Min Yang ◽  
Eui-Seok Chung ◽  
...  

<p><span>The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) models have showed substantial inter-model spread in estimating annual global-mean precipitation change per one-degree greenhouse-gas-induced warming (precipitation sensitivity), ranging from -4.5</span><span>–4.2</span><span>%</span><sup><span>o</span></sup><span>C<sup>-1</sup>in the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 2.6, the lowest emission scenario, to 0.2–4.0</span><span>%</span><sup><span>o</span></sup><span>C<sup>-1</sup>in the RCP 8.5, the highest emission scenario. The observed-based estimations in the global-mean land precipitation sensitivity during last few decades even show much larger spread due to the considerable natural interdecadal variability, role of anthropogenic aerosol forcing, and uncertainties in observation. This study tackles to better quantify and constrain global land precipitation change in response to global warming by analyzing the new range of Shared Socio-economic Pathway (SSP) scenarios in the </span><span>Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) compared with RCP scenarios in the CMIP5. We show that the range of projected change in annual global-mean land (ocean) precipitation by the end of the 21<sup>st</sup>century relative to the recent past (1995-2014) in the 23 CMIP6 models is over 50% (20%) larger than that in corresponding scenarios of the 40 CMIP5 models. The estimated ranges of precipitation sensitivity in four Tier-1 SSPs are also larger than those in corresponding CMIP5 RCPs. The large increase in projected precipitation change in the highest quartile over ocean is mainly due to the increased number of high equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) models in CMIP6 compared to CMIP5, but not over land due to different response of thermodynamic moisture convergence and dynamic processes to global warming. We further discuss key challenges in constraining future precipitation change and source of uncertainties in land precipitation change.</span></p>


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zebedee R. J. Nicholls ◽  
Malte Meinshausen ◽  
Jared Lewis ◽  
Robert Gieseke ◽  
Dietmar Dommenget ◽  
...  

Abstract. Here we present results from the first phase of the Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project (RCMIP). RCMIP is a systematic examination of reduced complexity climate models (RCMs), which are used to complement and extend the insights from more complex Earth System Models (ESMs), in particular those participating in the Sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). In Phase 1 of RCMIP, with 14 participating models namely ACC2, AR5IR (2 and 3 box versions), CICERO-SCM, ESCIMO, FaIR, GIR, GREB, Hector, Held et al. two layer model, MAGICC, MCE, OSCAR and WASP, we highlight the structural differences across various RCMs and show that RCMs are capable of reproducing global-mean surface air temperature (GSAT) changes of ESMs and historical observations. We find that some RCMs are capable of emulating the GSAT response of CMIP6 models to within a root-mean square error of 0.2 °C (of the same order of magnitude as ESM internal variability) over a range of scenarios. Running the same model configurations for both RCP and SSP scenarios, we see that the SSPs exhibit higher effective radiative forcing throughout the second half of the 21st Century. Comparing our results to the difference between CMIP5 and CMIP6 output, we find that the change in scenario explains approximately 46 % of the increase in higher end projected warming between CMIP5 and CMIP6. This suggests that changes in ESMs from CMIP5 to CMIP6 explain the rest of the increase, hence the higher climate sensitivities of available CMIP6 models may not be having as large an impact on GSAT projections as first anticipated. A second phase of RCMIP will complement RCMIP Phase 1 by exploring probabilistic results and emulation in more depth to provide results available for the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report author teams.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 2331-2368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Nowicki ◽  
Heiko Goelzer ◽  
Hélène Seroussi ◽  
Anthony J. Payne ◽  
William H. Lipscomb ◽  
...  

Abstract. Projection of the contribution of ice sheets to sea level change as part of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) takes the form of simulations from coupled ice sheet–climate models and stand-alone ice sheet models, overseen by the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). This paper describes the experimental setup for process-based sea level change projections to be performed with stand-alone Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet models in the context of ISMIP6. The ISMIP6 protocol relies on a suite of polar atmospheric and oceanic CMIP-based forcing for ice sheet models, in order to explore the uncertainty in projected sea level change due to future emissions scenarios, CMIP models, ice sheet models, and parameterizations for ice–ocean interactions. We describe here the approach taken for defining the suite of ISMIP6 stand-alone ice sheet simulations, document the experimental framework and implementation, and present an overview of the ISMIP6 forcing to be used by participating ice sheet modeling groups.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Lorenz ◽  
Frank Kreienkamp ◽  
Tobias Geiger

<p>Die Ergebnisse der Klimamodellierung, die im Rahmen des jüngsten Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) durchgeführt wurden, zeigen signifikante Veränderungen der modellspezifischen Gleichgewichtsklimaempfindlichkeit (Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity, ECS) im Vergleich zum Vorgängerprojekt CMIP5. Die neueren Versionen vieler globaler Klimamodelle (GCMs) weisen höhere ECS-Werte auf, die zu einer stärkeren globalen Erwärmung führen als zuvor berechnet. Gleichzeitig ist die Multi-GCM-Streuung von ECS unter CMIP6 deutlich größer als unter CMIP5.</p> <p>Ein Teil der im Rahmen von CMIP6 durchgeführten Klimaprojektionen wurden mittels der am DWD entwickelten statistisch-empirischen Downscaling-Methode EPISODES für das Gebiet von Deutschland regionalisiert. Diese Ergebnisse wurden mit vergleichbaren Datensätzen der CMIP5-Läufe verglichen. Die Ergebnisse dieser Analysen werden vorgestellt.</p>


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruyu Gan

<p><span> models from phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). </span><span>sea surface temperature</span></p>


2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (20) ◽  
pp. 8045-8059 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin M. Quinn ◽  
J. David Neelin

Abstract Distributions of precipitation cluster power (latent heat release rate integrated over contiguous precipitating pixels) are examined in 1°–2°-resolution members of phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) climate model ensemble. These approximately reproduce the power-law range and large event cutoff seen in observations and the High Resolution Atmospheric Model (HiRAM) at 0.25°–0.5° in Part I. Under the representative concentration pathway 8.5 (RCP8.5) global warming scenario, the change in the probability of the most intense storm clusters appears in all models and is consistent with HiRAM output, increasing by up to an order of magnitude relative to historical climate. For the three models in the ensemble with continuous time series of high-resolution output, there is substantial variability on when these probability increases for the most powerful storm clusters become detectable, ranging from detectable within the observational period to statistically significant trends emerging only after 2050. A similar analysis of National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP)–U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) AMIP-II reanalysis and Special Sensor Microwave Imager and Imager/Sounder (SSM/I and SSMIS) rain-rate retrievals in the recent observational record does not yield reliable evidence of trends in high power cluster probabilities at this time. However, the results suggest that maintaining a consistent set of overlapping satellite instrumentation with improvements to SSM/I–SSMIS rain-rate retrieval intercalibrations would be useful for detecting trends in this important tail behavior within the next couple of decades.


2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (22) ◽  
pp. 8372-8383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angeline G. Pendergrass ◽  
Dennis L. Hartmann

Abstract Changes in the frequency and intensity of rainfall are an important potential impact of climate change. Two modes of change, a shift and an increase, are applied to simulations of global warming with models from phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). The response to CO2 doubling in the multimodel mean of CMIP5 daily rainfall is characterized by an increase of 1% K−1 at all rain rates and a shift to higher rain rates of 3.3% K−1. In addition to these increase and shift modes of change, some models also show a substantial increase in rainfall at the highest rain rates called the extreme mode of response to warming. In some models, this extreme mode can be shown to be associated with increases in grid-scale condensation or gridpoint storms.


2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (17) ◽  
pp. 6238-6256 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. David Neelin ◽  
Baird Langenbrunner ◽  
Joyce E. Meyerson ◽  
Alex Hall ◽  
Neil Berg

Abstract Projections of possible precipitation change in California under global warming have been subject to considerable uncertainty because California lies between the region anticipated to undergo increases in precipitation at mid-to-high latitudes and regions of anticipated decrease in the subtropics. Evaluation of the large-scale model experiments for phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) suggests a greater degree of agreement on the sign of the winter (December–February) precipitation change than in the previous such intercomparison, indicating a greater portion of California falling within the increased precipitation zone. While the resolution of global models should not be relied on for accurate depiction of topographic rainfall distribution within California, the precipitation changes depend substantially on large-scale shifts in the storm tracks arriving at the coast. Significant precipitation increases in the region arriving at the California coast are associated with an eastward extension of the region of strong Pacific jet stream, which appears to be a robust feature of the large-scale simulated changes. This suggests that effects of this jet extension in steering storm tracks toward the California coast constitute an important factor that should be assessed for impacts on incoming storm properties for high-resolution regional model assessments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document