Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Sources of knowledge and ignorance in climate research

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ignorance is an inevitable component of climate change research, and yet it has not been specifically catered for in standard uncertainty guidance documents for climate assessments. Reports of ignorance in understanding require context to explain how such ignorance does and does not affect understanding more generally. The focus of this article is on dynamical sources of ignorance in regional climate change projections. A key source of ignorance in the projections is the resolution-limited treatment of dynamical instabilities in the ocean component of coupled climate models. A consequence of this limitation is that it is very difficult to quantify uncertainty in regional projections of climate variables that depend critically upon the details of the atmospheric flow. The standard methods for quantifying or reducing uncertainty in regional projections are predicated on the models capturing and representing the key dynamical instabilities, which is doubtful for present coupled models. This limitation does not apply to all regional projections, nor does it apply to the fundamental findings of greenhouse climate change. Much of what is known is not highly flow-dependent and follows from well grounded radiative physics and thermodynamic principles. The growing field of applications of regional climate projections would benefit from a more critical appraisal of ignorance in these projections.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The term ‘dynamics’ is used here to refer to model instabilities and flow simulated from the model primitive equations as distinct from ‘physics’ represented by radiation, convection, and other model processes.

References

  • Bolin B (1994) Science and policy making. Ambio 23(1):25–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen J, Hewitson B, Busuioc A, Chen A, Gao X, Held R, Jones R, Kolli R, Kwon W, Laprise R et al (2007) Regional climate projections. In: Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group 1 to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, chapter 11. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunnington WM, Mitchell J (1990) On the dependence of climate sensitivity on convective parametrization. Clim Dynam 4(2):85–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson R (1985) Climate sensitivity. Adv Geophys 28(1):99–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederiksen J, Frederiksen C (2007) Inter-decadal changes in Southern Hemisphere winter storm track modes. Tellus 59(5):599–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederiksen J, O’Kane T (2008) Entropy, closures and subgrid modeling. Entropy 10(4):635–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederiksen J, Dix M, Kepert S (1996) Systematic energy errors and the tendency toward canonical equilibrium in atmospheric circulation models. J Atmos Sci 53(6):887–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funtowicz S, Ravetz J (1990) Uncertainty and quality in science for policy. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 229pp

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Giorgi F, Hewitson B et al (2001) Regional climate information—evaluation and projections. In: Climate change 2001: the scientific basis, chapter 10, pp 583–638. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 881pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffies S, Hallberg R (2000) Biharmonic friction with a Smagorinsky-like viscosity for use in large-scale eddy-permitting ocean models. Mon Weather Rev 128(8):2935–2946

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guilyardi E, Wittenberg A, Fedorov A, Collins M, Wang C, Capotondi A, van Oldenborgh G, Stockdale T (2009) Understanding El Niño in ocean-atmosphere general circulation models: progress and challenges. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 90(3):325–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen J, Takahashi T (1984) Climate processes and climate sensitivity. AGU Geophys Monogr 29(Maurice Ewing, vol 5)

  • Hansen J, Rind D, Del Genio A, Lacis A, Lebedeff S, Prather M, Ruedy R, Karl T (1989) Regional greenhouse climate effects. In: Coping with climatic change: proceedings of the second north American conference on preparing for climate change. The Climate Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen J, Sato M, Kharecha P, Beerling D, Berner R, Masson-Delmotte V, Pagani M, Raymo M, Royer D, Zachos J (2008) Target atmospheric \(\mbox{CO}_{2}\): where should humanity aim? Open Atmos Sci J 2:217–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins E, Sutton R (2009) The potential to narrow uncertainty in regional climate predictions. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 90(8):1095–1107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegerl G, Crowley T, Hyde W, Frame D (2006) Climate sensitivity constrained by temperature reconstructions over the past seven centuries. Nature 440(7087):1029–1032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Held I (1993) Large-scale dynamics and global warming. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 74(2):228–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Held I, Soden B (2006) Robust responses of the hydrological cycle to global warming. J Climate 19(21):5686–5699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houghton JT et al (eds) (1996) Climate change 1995: the science of climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 572pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Houghton JT, Jenkins G, Ephraums J (eds) (1990) Climate change: the IPCC scientific assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 365pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ, Noguer M, van der Linden PJ, Dai X, Maskell K, Johnson CA (eds) (2001) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 881pp

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2006) Guidance notes for lead authors of the IPCC fourth assessment report on addressing uncertainties. Appendix in Manning 2006 Adv. Cli. Cha. Res., vol 2, pp 13–21

  • Kalnay E (2002) Atmospheric modeling, data assimilation and predictability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 364pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Kandlikar M, Risbey J, Dessai S (2005) Representing and communicating deep uncertainty in climate change assessments. Comptes Rendus Geoscience 337(4):443–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lal M, Ramanathan V (1984) The effects of moist convection and water vapor radiative processes on climate sensitivity. J Atmos Sci 41(14):2238–2249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis J (1998) Clarifying the dynamics of the general circulation: Phillips’s 1956 experiment. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 79(1):39–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorenz E (1969) The predictability of a flow which possesses many scales of motion. Tellus 21(3):289–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorius C, Jouzel J, Raynaud D, Hansen J, Le Treut H (1990) The ice-core record: climate sensitivity and future greenhouse warming. Nature 347(6289):139–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch P (2006) The emergence of numerical weather prediction: Richardson’s dream. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 279pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Manabe S, Wetherald R (1967) Thermal equilibrium of the atmosphere with a given distribution of relative humidity. J Atmos Sci 24(3):241–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manabe S, Wetherald R, Stouffer R (1981) Summer dryness due to an increase of atmospheric CO2 concentration. Clim Change 3(4):347–386

    Google Scholar 

  • Mastrandrea M, Field C, Stocker T, Edenhofer O, Ebi K, Frame D, Held H, Kriegler E, Mach K, Plattner G, Yohe G, Zwiers F (2010) Guidance notes for lead authors of the IPCC fifth assessment report on consistent treatment of uncertainties. Available at http://www.ipcc.ch

  • Maxino C, McAvaney B, Pitman A, Perkins S (2008) Ranking the AR4 climate models over the Murray–Darling basin using simulated maximum temperature, minimum temperature and precipitation. Int J Climatol 28(8):1097–1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meehl G, Covey C, Delworth T, Latif M, McAvaney B, Mitchell J, Stouffer R, Taylor K (2007) The WCRP CMIP3 multimodel dataset: a new era in climate change research. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 88(9):1383–1394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell J, Karoly DJ et al (2001) Detection of climate change and attribution of causes. In: Climate change 2001: the scientific basis, chapter 12, pp 695–738. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 881pp

  • Moss R, Schneider SH (2000) Uncertainties in the IPCC TAR: recommendations to lead authors for more consistent assessment and reporting. In: Pachauri R, Taniguchi T, Tanaka K (eds) Guidance papers on the cross cutting issues of the third assessment report of the IPCC. Technical report, World Meteorological Organization, pp 33–51

  • O’Kane T, Frederiksen J (2008) Statistical dynamical subgrid-scale parameterizations for geophysical flows. Physica Scripta T132(010433)

  • O’Kane T, Frederiksen J, Dix M (2009) Sampling errors in estimation of the small scales of monthly mean climate. Atmos Ocean 47(2):160–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer M, O Neill B, Webster M, Agrawala S (2007) The limits of consensus. Science 317(5844):1505–1506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer T (2010) Is science fiction a genre for communicating scientific research? A case study in climate prediction. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 91(10):1413–1415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer T, Doblas-Reyes F, Weisheimer A, Rodwell M (2008) Toward seamless prediction: calibration of climate change projections using seasonal forecasts. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 89(4):459–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paltridge G (2009) The climate caper. Quartet Books, London, 130pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Parry M, Canziani O, Palutikof J, van der Linden P, Hanson C (eds) (2007) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. In: Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 986pp

  • Pierrehumbert R (2011) Infrared radiation and planetary temperature. Phys Today 64(1):33–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramanathan V, Coakley J (1978) Climate modeling through radiative-convective models. Rev Geophys Space Phys 16(4):465–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramanathan V, Callis L, Cess R, Hansen J, Isaksen I, Kuhn W, Lacis A, Luther F, Mahlman J, Reck R, Schlesinger M (1987) Climate-chemical interactions and effects of changing atmospheric trace gases. Rev Geophys 25(7):1441–1482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravetz J (1986) Usable knowledge, usable ignorance: incomplete science with policy implications. In: Sustainable development of the biosphere, chapter 15. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 415–432

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson L (1922) Weather prediction by numerical process. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Reprinted by Dover Publications, 1965. Reprinted by Cambrige University Press, 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • Risbey JS (2002) Comment on Soon et al 2002: modeling climatic effects of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions: unknowns and uncertainties. Clim Res 22(2):185–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risbey J (2010) The strawmen of climatology. Australas Sci 31(8):36–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Risbey JS, Stone PH (1996) A case study of the adequacy of GCM simulations for input to regional climate change assessments. J Clim 9(7):1441–1467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risbey J, Kandlikar M (2007) Expressions of likelihood and confidence in the IPCC uncertainty assessment process. Clim Change 85(1–2):19–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risbey JS, Lamb PJ, Miller RL, Morgan MC, Roe GH (2002) Exploring the structure of regional climate scenarios by combining synoptic and dynamic guidance and GCM output. J Clim 15(9):1036–1050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scaife A, Woollings T, Knight J, Martin G, Hinton T (2010) Atmospheric blocking and mean biases in climate models. J Clim 23(23):6143–6152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider T, O’Gorman P, Levine X (2010) Water vapor and the dynamics of climate changes. Rev Geophys 48(RG3001):1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Seager R, Naik N, Vecchi G (2010) Thermodynamic and dynamic mechanisms for large-scale changes in the hydrological cycle in response to global warming. J Clim 23(17):4561–4668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senior C, Mitchell J (1993) Carbon dioxide and climate: the impact of cloud parameterization. J Clim 6(3):393–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shackley S, Risbey J, Stone P, Wynne B (1999) Adjusting to policy expectations in climate change modeling: an interdisciplinary study of flux adjustments in coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation models. Clim Change 43(2):413–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherwood S, Schmidt G (2011) Messy models. Bull Am Meteorol Soc (in press)

  • Shukla J, Palmer TN, Hagedorn R, Hoskins B, Kinter J, Marotzke J, Miller M, Slingo J (2010) Toward a new generation of world climate research and computing facilities. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 91(10):1407–1412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons A, Hollingsworth A (2002) Some aspects of the improvement in skill of numerical weather prediction. Q J R Meteor Soc 128(580):647–677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith K (2007) The geography of linear baroclinic instability in Earth’s oceans. J Mar Res 65(5):655–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt K, Tignor M, Miller H (eds) (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. In: Contribution of working group 1 to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 996pp

  • Toth Z, Kalnay E (1997) Ensemble forecasting at NCEP and the breeding method. Mon Weather Rev 125(12):3297–3319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Sluijs J (1997) Anchoring amid uncertainty. University of Utrecht, Utrecht. PhD Thesis, 260pp

  • van der Sluijs J (2005) Uncertainty as a monster in the science-policy interface: four coping strategies. Water Sci Technol 52(6):87–92

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Sluijs J, Eijndhoven J, Shackley S, Wynne B (1998) Anchoring devices in science for policy: the case of consensus around climate sensitivity. Soc Stud Sci 28(2):291–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Sluijs J, van Est R, Riphagen M (2010) Beyond consensus: reflections from a democratic perspective on the interaction between climate politics and science. Current Opinion in Environ Sutainability 2(5–6):409–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vecchi G, Wittenberg A (2010) El Niño and our future climate: where do we stand? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 1(2):260–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang W, Yung Y, Lacis A, Mo T, Hansen J (1976) Greenhouse effects due to man-made perturbations of trace gases. Science 194(4266):685–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zidihkeri M, Frederiksen J (2010) Stochastic modelling of unresolved eddy fluxes. Geophys Astrophys Fluid Dyn 104:323–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Jaci Brown, Piers Dunstan, Paul Durack, Ana Lopez, Les Muir, Jerry Ravetz, Steve Sherwood, Tom Trull, Jeroen van der Sluijs, and Meelis Zidikheri provided critical comments. Support was provided by the Climate Adaptation Flagship and Wealth from Oceans Flagship of CSIRO.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research, Hobart, Australia

    James S. Risbey & Terence J. O’Kane

  2. CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Box 1538, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia

    James S. Risbey

Authors
  1. James S. Risbey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Terence J. O’Kane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James S. Risbey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Risbey, J.S., O’Kane, T.J. Sources of knowledge and ignorance in climate research. Climatic Change 108, 755 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0186-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0186-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation