Climatic Change

, 97:85

Uncertainties in climate stabilization

  • T. M. L. Wigley
  • L. E. Clarke
  • J. A. Edmonds
  • H. D. Jacoby
  • S. Paltsev
  • H. Pitcher
  • J. M. Reilly
  • R. Richels
  • M. C. Sarofim
  • S. J. Smith
Article

Abstract

The atmospheric composition, temperature and sea level implications out to 2300 of new reference and cost-optimized stabilization emissions scenarios produced using three different Integrated Assessment (IA) models are described and assessed. Stabilization is defined in terms of radiative forcing targets for the sum of gases potentially controlled under the Kyoto Protocol. For the most stringent stabilization case (“Level 1” with CO2 concentration stabilizing at about 450 ppm), peak CO2 emissions occur close to today, implying (in the absence of a substantial CO2 concentration overshoot) a need for immediate CO2 emissions abatement if we wish to stabilize at this level. In the extended reference case, CO2 stabilizes at about 1,000 ppm in 2200—but even to achieve this target requires large and rapid CO2 emissions reductions over the twenty-second century. Future temperature changes for the Level 1 stabilization case differ noticeably between the IA models even when a common set of climate model parameters is used (largely a result of different assumptions for non-Kyoto gases). For the Level 1 stabilization case, there is a probability of approximately 50% that warming from pre-industrial times will be less than (or more than) 2°C. For one of the IA models, warming in the Level 1 case is actually greater out to 2040 than in the reference case due to the effect of decreasing SO2 emissions that occur as a side effect of the policy-driven reduction in CO2 emissions. This effect is less noticeable for the other stabilization cases, but still leads to policies having virtually no effect on global-mean temperatures out to around 2060. Sea level rise uncertainties are very large. For example, for the Level 1 stabilization case, increases range from 8 to 120 cm for changes over 2000 to 2300.

Supplementary material

10584_2009_9585_MOESM1_ESM.gif (46 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 1

(GIF 46 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM1_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM2_ESM.gif (35 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 2

(GIF 35 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM2_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM3_ESM.gif (54 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 3

(GIF 54 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM3_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM4_ESM.gif (56 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 4

(GIF 56 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM4_ESM.eps (32.3 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM5_ESM.gif (41 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 5

(GIF 41 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM5_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM6_ESM.gif (42 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 6

(GIF 42 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM6_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM7_ESM.gif (19 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 7

(GIF 19 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM7_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM8_ESM.gif (31 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 8

(GIF 31 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM8_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM9_ESM.gif (33 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 9

(GIF 33 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM9_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM10_ESM.gif (40 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 10

(GIF 40 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM10_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM11_ESM.gif (29 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 11

(GIF 29 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM11_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM12_ESM.gif (31 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 12

(GIF 31 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM12_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM13_ESM.gif (31 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 13

(GIF 31 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM13_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM14_ESM.gif (29 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 14

(GIF 29 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM14_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)
10584_2009_9585_MOESM15_ESM.gif (18 kb)
Supplementary Fig. 15

(GIF 18 KB)

10584_2009_9585_MOESM15_ESM.eps (32.2 mb)
High resolution image file (EPS 32 MB)

References

  1. Church JA, Gregory JM, Huybrechts P, Kuhn M, Lambeck K, Nhuan MT, Qin D, Woodworth PL (2001) Changes in sea level. In: Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ, Noguer M, van der Linden PJ, Dai X, Maskell K, Johnson CA (eds) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis, contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 639–693Google Scholar
  2. Clarke LE, Edmonds JA, Jacoby HD, Pitcher H, Reilly JM, Richels R (2007) Scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions and atmospheric concentrations. Sub-report 2.1a of synthesis and assessment product 2.1. A report by the climate change science program and the subcommittee on global change research, Washington, DC. 154 ppGoogle Scholar
  3. Cubasch U, Meehl GM, Boer GJ, Stouffer RJ, Dix M, Noda A, Senior CA, Raper SCB, Yap KS (2001) Projections of future climate change. In: Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ, Noguer M, van der Linden PJ, Dai X, Maskell K, Johnson CA (eds) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis, contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 525–582Google Scholar
  4. Friedlingstein P, Cox P, Betts R, Bopp L, von Bloh W, Brovkin V, Cadule P, Doney S, Eby M, Fung I, Bala G, John J, Jones C, Joos F, Kato T, Kawamiya M, Knorr W, Lindsay K, Matthews HD, Raddatz T, Rayner P, Reick C, Roeckner E, Schnitzler K-G, Schnur R, Strassmann K, Weaver AJ, Yoshikawa C, Zenget N (2006) Climate-carbon cycle feedback analysis: results from the C4MIP model intercomparison. J Clim 19:3337–3353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hegerl GC, Zwiers FW, Braconnot P, Gillett NP, Luo Y, Marengo Oraini JA, Nicholls N, Penner JE, Stott PA (2007) Understanding and attributing climate change. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climatic change 2007: the physical basis, contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 663–745Google Scholar
  6. Joos F, Prentice IC, Sitch S, Meyer R, Hooss G, Plattner G-K, Gerber S, Hasselmann K (2001) Global warming feedbacks on terrestrial carbon uptake under the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) emissions scenarios. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 15:891–908. doi:10.1029/2000GB001375 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kheshgi HS, Jain AK (2003) Projecting future climate change: implications of carbon cycle model intercomparisons. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 17:1047. doi:10.1029/2001GB001842 (see also http://frodo.atmos.uiuc.edu/isam)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kim SH, Edmonds JA, Lurz J, Smith SJ, Wise MA (2006) The ObjECTS framework for integrated assessment: hybrid modeling of transportation. Energy J 2(2006):51–80 (Special Issue)Google Scholar
  9. MacFarling Meure C, Etheridge D, Trudinger C, Steele P, Langenfelds R, van Ommen T, Smith A, Elkins J (2006) Law Dome CO2, CH4 and N2O ice core records extemded to 2000 years BP. Geophys Res Lett 33:L14810. doi:10:1029/2006GL026152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Manabe S, Stouffer RJ (1993) Century-scale effects of increased atmospheric CO2 on the ocean-atmosphere system. Nature 364:215–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Manne AS, Richels RG (2001) An alternative approach to establishing trade-offs among greenhouse gases. Nature 410:675–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Meehl GA, Stocker TF, Collins WD, Friedlingstein P, Gaye AT, Gregory JM, Kitoh A, Knutti R, Murphy JM, Noda A, Raper SCB, Watterson IG, Weaver AJ, Zhao Z-C (2007) Global climate projections. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climatic change 2007: the physical basis, contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 747–845Google Scholar
  13. Meinshausen M (2006) What does a 2°C target mean for greenhouse gas concentrations? A brief analysis based on multi-gas emission pathways and several climate sensitivity uncertainty estimates. In: Schellnhuber HJ, Cramer W, Nakićenović N, Wigley TML, Yohe G (eds) Avoiding dangerous climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 265–280Google Scholar
  14. Meinshausen M, Raper SCB, Wigley TML (2008a) Emulating complex atmosphere-ocean climate models and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC 6.0—part 1, model description and calibration. Atmos Chem Phys 8 (in press)Google Scholar
  15. Meinshausen M, Raper SCB, Wigley TML (2008b) Emulating complex atmosphere-ocean climate models and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC 6.0—part 2, applications. Atmos Chem Phys 8 (in press)Google Scholar
  16. Nakićenović N, Swart R (eds) (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 570 ppGoogle Scholar
  17. Osborn TJ, Wigley TML (1994) A simple model for estimating methane concentration and lifetime variations. Clim Dyn 9:181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Paltsev S, Reilly JM, Jacoby HD, Eckaus RS, McFarland J, Sarofim MC, Asadoorian M, Babiker M (2005) The MIT emissions prediction and policy analysis (EPPA) model: version 4Google Scholar
  19. Prinn R, Reilly JM, Sarofim MC, Wang C, Felzer B (2007) Effects of air pollution control on climate. In: Schlesinger M, de la Chesnaye FC, Kheshgi H, Kolstad CD, Reilly J, Smith JB, Wilson T (eds) Human induced climate change: an interdisciplinary assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 93–102Google Scholar
  20. Reilly JM, Prinn R, Harnisch J, Fitzmaurice J, Jacoby H, Kicklighter D, Melillo J, Stone P, Sokolov I, Wang C (1999) Multi-gas assessment of the Kyoto Protocol. Nature 401:549–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Richels R, Manne AS, Wigley TML (2007) Moving beyond concentrations: the challenge of limiting temperature change. In: Schlesinger M, de la Chesnaye FC, Kheshgi H, Kolstad CD, Reilly J, Smith JB, Wilson T (eds) Human induced climate change: an interdisciplinary assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 387–402Google Scholar
  22. Sarofim MC, Forest CE, Reiner DM, Reilly JM (2005) Stabilization and global climate policy. Glob Planet Change 47(2–4):266–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith SJ, Wigley TML (2006) Multi-gas forcing stabilization with MiniCAM. Energy J 3(2006):373–391 (Special Issue)Google Scholar
  24. Smith SJ, Pitcher H, Wigley TML (2005) Future sulfur dioxide emissions. Clim Change 73:267–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Alley RB, Bernsten T, Bindoff NL, Chen Z, Chidthaisong A, Gregory JM, Hegerl GC, Heimann M, Hewitson B, Hoskins BJ, Joos F, Jouzel J, Kattsov V, Lohmann U, Matsuno T, Molina M, Nicholls N, Overpeck J, Raga G, Ramaswamy V, Ren J, Rusticucci M, Somerville R, Stocker TF, Whetton P, Wood RA, Wratt D (2007) Technical summary. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climatic change 2007: the physical basis, contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 19–91Google Scholar
  26. Wigley TML (1991) Could reducing fossil-fuel emissions cause global warming? Nature 349:503–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wigley TML (1993) Balancing the carbon budget. Implications for projections of future carbon dioxide concentration changes. Tellus 45B:409–425Google Scholar
  28. Wigley TML (1995) Global-mean temperature and sea level consequences of greenhouse gas concentration stabilization. Geophys Res Lett 22:45–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wigley TML (2006) A combined mitigation/geoengineering approach to climate stabilization. Science 314:452–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wigley TML (2007) CO2 emissions: a piece of the pie. Science 316:829–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wigley TML, Raper SCB (2001) Interpretation of high projections for global-mean warming. Science 293:451–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wigley TML, Raper SCB (2005) Extended scenarios for glacier melt due to anthropogenic forcing. Geophys Res Lett 32:L05704. doi:10.1029/2004GL021238 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wigley TML, Richels R, Edmonds JA (2007) Overshoot pathways to CO2 stabilization in a multi-gas context. In: Schlesinger M, de la Chesnaye FC, Kheshgi H, Kolstad CD, Reilly J, Smith JB, Wilson T (eds) Human induced climate change: an interdisciplinary assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 84–92Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. M. L. Wigley
    • 1
  • L. E. Clarke
    • 2
  • J. A. Edmonds
    • 2
  • H. D. Jacoby
    • 3
  • S. Paltsev
    • 3
  • H. Pitcher
    • 2
  • J. M. Reilly
    • 3
  • R. Richels
    • 4
  • M. C. Sarofim
    • 3
  • S. J. Smith
    • 2
  1. 1.National Center for Atmospheric ResearchBoulderUSA
  2. 2.Joint Global Change Research InstituteCollege ParkUSA
  3. 3.Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global ChangeMITCambridgeUSA
  4. 4.Electric Power Research InstitutePalo AltoUSA

Personalised recommendations