Scenarios in IPCC assessments: lessons from AR6 and opportunities for AR7

Scenarios have been an important integrating element in the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the understanding of possible climate outcomes, impacts and risks, and mitigation futures. Integration supports a consistent, coherent assessment, new insights and the opportunity to address policy-relevant questions that would not be possible otherwise, for example, which impacts are unavoidable, which are reversible, what is a consistent remaining carbon budget to keep temperatures below a level and what would be a consistent route of action to achieve that goal. The AR6 builds on community frameworks that are developed to support a coherent use of scenarios across the assessment, yet their use in the assessment and the related timelines presented coordination challenges. From lessons within each Working Group (WG) assessment and the cross-WG experience, we present insights into the role of scenarios in future assessments, including the enhanced integration of impacts into scenarios, near-term information and community coordination efforts. Recommendations and opportunities are discussed for how scenarios can support strengthened consistency and policy relevance in the next IPCC assessment cycle

Changes in IPCC Scenario Assessment Emulators Between SR1.5 and AR6 Unraveled

The IPCC's scientific assessment of the timing of net-zero emissions and 2030 emission reduction targets consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C or 2°C rests on large scenario databases. Updates to this assessment, such as between the IPCC's Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR1.5) of warming and the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), are the result of intertwined, sometimes opaque, factors. Here we isolate one factor: the Earth System Model emulators used to estimate the global warming implications of scenarios. We show that warming projections using AR6-calibrated emulators are consistent, to within around 0.1°C, with projections made by the emulators used in SR1.5. The consistency is due to two almost compensating changes: the increase in assessed historical warming between SR1.5 (based on AR5) and AR6, and a reduction in projected warming due to improved agreement between the emulators' response to emissions and the assessment to which it is calibrated

Carbon dioxide and climate impulse response functions for the computation of greenhouse gas metrics: A multi-model analysis

The responses of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other climate variables to an emission pulse of CO2 into the atmosphere are often used to compute the Global Warming Potential (GWP) and Global Temperature change Potential (GTP), to characterize the response timescales of Earth System models, and to build reduced-form models. In this carbon cycle-climate model intercomparison project, which spans the full model hierarchy, we quantify responses to emission pulses of different magnitudes injected under different conditions. The CO2 response shows the known rapid decline in the first few decades followed by a millennium-scale tail. For a 100 Gt-C emission pulse added to a constant CO2 concentration of 389 ppm, 25 ± 9% is still found in the atmosphere after 1000 yr; the ocean has absorbed 59 ± 12% and the land the remainder (16 ± 14%). The response in global mean surface air temperature is an increase by 0.20 ± 0.12 °C within the first twenty years; thereafter and until year 1000, temperature decreases only slightly, whereas ocean heat content and sea level continue to rise. Our best estimate for the Absolute Global Warming Potential, given by the time-integrated response in CO2 at year 100 multiplied by its radiative efficiency, is 92.5 × 10−15 yr W m−2 per kg-CO2. This value very likely (5 to 95% confidence) lies within the range of (68 to 117) × 10−15 yr W m−2 per kg-CO2. Estimates for time-integrated response in CO2 published in the IPCC First, Second, and Fourth Assessment and our multi-model best estimate all agree within 15% during the first 100 yr. The integrated CO2 response, normalized by the pulse size, is lower for pre-industrial conditions, compared to present day, and lower for smaller pulses than larger pulses. In contrast, the response in temperature, sea level and ocean heat content is less sensitive to these choices. Although, choices in pulse size, background concentration, and model lead to uncertainties, the most important and subjective choice to determine AGWP of CO2 and GWP is the time horizon

Assessing the metrics of climate change : current methods and future possibilities

With the principle of comprehensiveness embedded in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (Art. 3), a multi-gas abatement strategy with emphasis also on non-CO2 greenhouse gases as targets for reduction and control measures has been adopted in the international climate regime. In the Kyoto Protocol, the comprehensive approach is made operative as the “aggregate anthropogenic carbon dioxide equivalent emissions” of six specified greenhouse gases or groups of gases (Art. 3). With this operationalisation, the emissions of a set of greenhouse gases with very different atmospheric lifetimes and radiative properties are transformed into one common unit – “CO2 equivalents”. This transformation is based on the Global Warming Potential (GWP) index, which in turn is based on the concept of radiative forcing. The GWP metric and its application in policy making has been debated, and several other alternative concepts have been suggested. In this paper, we review existing and alternative metrics of climate change, with particular emphasis on radiative forcing and GWPs, in terms of their scientific performance. This assessment focuses on questions such as the climate impact (end point) against which gases are weighted; the extent to which and how temporality is included, both with regard to emission control and with regard to climate impact; how cost issues are dealt with; and the sensitivity of the metrics to various assumptions. It is concluded that the radiative forcing concept is a robust and useful metric of the potential climatic impact of various agents and that there are prospects for improvement by weighing different forcings according to their effectiveness. We also find that although the GWP concept is associated with serious shortcomings, it retains advantages over any of the proposed alternatives in terms of political feasibility. Alternative metrics, however, make a significant contribution to addressing important issues, and this contribution should be taken into account in the further development of refined metrics of climate change

Climate and air quality-driven scenarios of ozone and aerosol precursor abatement

In addition to causing domestic and regional environmental effects, many air pollutants contribute to radiative forcing (RF) of the climate system. However, climate effects are not considered when cost-effective abatement targets for these pollutant are established, nor are they included in current international climate agreements. We construct air pollution abatement scenarios in 2030 which target cost-effective reductions in RF i the EU, USA, and China and compare these to abatement scenarios which instead target regional ozone effects and particulate matter concentrations. Our analysis covers emissions of PM (fine, black carbon and organic carbon), SO2, NOx, CH4, VOCs, and CO. We find that the effect synergies are strong for PM/BC, VOC, CO and CH4. While an air quality strategy targeted at reducing ozone will also reduce RF, this will not be the case for a strategy targeting particulate matter. Abatement in China dominates RF reduction, but there are cheap abatement options also available in the EU and USA. The justification for international cooperation on air quality issues is underlined when he co-benefits of reduced RF are considered. Some species, most importantly SO2, contribute a negative forcing on climate. We suggest that given current knowledge, NOx and SO2 should be ignored in RF-targeted abatement policies

Indirect forcing from emissions of Nox and CO: is the location of emissions important ?

International audienc

Aircraft routing with minimal climate impact: The REACT4C climate cost function modelling approach (V1.0)

In addition to CO2, the climate impact of aviation is strongly influenced by non-CO2 emissions, such as nitrogen oxides, influencing ozone and methane, and water vapour, which can lead to the formation of persistent contrails in ice supersaturated regions. Because these non-CO2 emission effects are characterised by a short lifetime, their climate impact largely depends on emission location and time, i.e. emissions in certain locations (or times) can lead to a greater climate impact (even on the global average) than the same emission in other locations (or times). Avoiding these climate sensitive regions might thus be beneficial to climate. Here, we describe a modelling chain for investigating this climate impact mitigation option. It forms a multi-step modelling approach, starting with the simulation of the fate of emissions released at a certain location and time (time-region grid points). This is performed with the chemistry–climate model EMAC, extended by the two submodels AIRTRAC (V1.0) and CONTRAIL (V1.0), which describe the contribution of emissions to the composition of the atmosphere and to contrail formation, respectively. The impact of emissions from the large number of time-region grid points is efficiently calculated by applying a Lagrangian scheme. EMAC also includes the calculation of radiative impacts, which are, in a second step, the input to climate metric formulas describing the global climate impact of the mission at each time-region grid point. The result of the modelling chain comprises a four dimensional dataset in space and time, which we call climate cost functions, and which describe at each grid point and each point in time, the global climate impact of an emission. In a third step, these climate cost functions are used in an air traffic simulator (SAAM), coupled to an emission tool (AEM) to optimise aircraft trajectories for the North Atlantic region. Here, we describe the details of this new modelling approach and show some example results. A number of sensitivity analyses are performed to motivate the settings of individual parameters. A stepwise sanity check of the results of the modelling chain is undertaken to demonstrate the plausibility of the climate cost functions