Journal of Oceanography

, Volume 67, Issue 1, pp 113–126 | Cite as

Coupled climate-society modeling of a realistic scenario to achieve a sustainable Earth

  • Motoyoshi IkedaEmail author
Original Article


A conceptual model was developed to project the global warming for this century. This model incorporated several important factors associated with the climate and society. Under the forcing of anthropogenic carbon dioxide, the climate system is represented by a global mean surface air temperature (SAT) and carbon storage, which is separated into the atmosphere, land and oceans. The SAT rises due to the atmospheric carbon, which is partially absorbed by the terrestrial ecosystem and the ocean. These absorption rates are reduced by the rising SAT. The anthropogenic carbon dioxide is emitted by society, which is described by global energy production (P) and energy efficiency/carbon intensity (E), yielding a rate of P/E. P consists of the energy production per capita (H) and the population (M) in developed countries and regions, P = H × M. These society components were set to grow, based on the historical record from the last 50 years, while societal incentives to reduce the growth rate H and to increase E in proportion to the increase in SAT were introduced. It is shown that, among the basic scenarios in the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) for this century, medium-level carbon emission—where the growth rate of H is reduced by 30% and E is doubled, with 1°C of warming—could be achieved. Until the end of this century, both the terrestrial ecosystem and the oceans act as sinks. If societal incentives are eliminated, carbon emission approaches the upper limit considered in the SRES scenarios, and the terrestrial ecosystem changes into a source of carbon dioxide. Since H and E are closely related to lifestyle and technology, respectively, individuals in the developed countries are urged to change their lifestyles, and institutions need to develop low-carbon technologies and spread them to developing countries. When society achieves medium-level carbon emission for a couple of centuries, oceanic absorption was found to become more crucial than terrestrial absorption, so oceanic behavior has to be estimated more accurately.


Global warming Climate-society model Future projection Carbon cycle 



The financial support of the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science and Technology was fundamental to this work. Fruitful discussions with Dr. Y. Watanabe, Dr. F. Yoshida and many colleagues in the 21st Century Center of Excellence Program “Prediction and Avoidance of a Drastic Change in the Biogeosphere System” and the “Sustainability Governance Project” are also acknowledged and appreciated. My gratitude is also extended to A. Yamada for solid operation of the coupled climate–society model.


  1. Archer D, Martin P, Buffett B, Brovkin V, Rahmstorf S, Ganopolski A (2004) The importance of ocean temperature to global biogeochemistry. Frontiers Earth Planet Sci Lett 222:333–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bates NR, Mathis JT (2009) The Arctic Ocean marine carbon cycle: evaluation of air–sea CO2 exchanges, ocean acidification impacts and potential feedbacks. Biogeosciences 6:2433–2459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bopp L, Aumont O, Cadule P, Alvain S, Gehlen M (2005) Response of diatoms distribution to global warming and potential implications: a global model study. Geophys Res Lett 32:L19606. doi: 10.1029/2005GL023653 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bryden HL, Longworth HR, Cunningham SA (2005) Slowing of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation at 25°N. Nature 438:655–657. doi: 10.1038/nature04385 Google Scholar
  5. Chhak KC, Lorenzo ED, Schneider N, Cummins PF (2009) Forcing of low-frequency ocean variability in the Northeast Pacific. J Climate 22:1255–1276. doi: 10.1175/2008JCLI2639.1 Google Scholar
  6. Claussen M et al (2002) Earth system models of intermediate complexity: closing the gap in the spectrum of climate system models. Clim Dyn 18:579–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Comins HN, McMurtrie RE (1993) Long-term response of nutrient-limited forests to CO2 enrichment-equilibrium behavior of plant–soil models. Ecol Appl 3:666–681Google Scholar
  8. Cramer W et al (2001) Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to CO2 and climate change: results from six dynamic global vegetation models. Glob Change Biol 7:357–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edmonds JA, Clarke J, Dooley J, Kim SH, Smith SJ (2004) Modeling greenhouse gas energy technology responses to climate change. Energy 29:1529–1536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Friedlingstein P, Cox P, Betts R, Bopp L, von Bloh W et al (2006) Climate–carbon cycle feedback analysis: results from the C4MIP model intercomparison. J Climate 19:3337–3353Google Scholar
  11. Fujino J, Nair R, Kainuma M, Masui T, Matsuoka Y (2006) Multi-gas mitigation analysis on stabilization scenarios using AIM global model. Multigas mitigation and climate policy. Energy J 343–353Google Scholar
  12. Fukasawa M, Freeland H, Perkin R, Watanabe T, Uchida H, Nishina A (2004) Bottom water warming in the North Pacific Ocean. Nature 427:825–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gruber N, Keeling CD, Bates NR (2002) Interannual variability in the North Atlantic Ocean carbon sink. Science 298:2374–2378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gruber N, Friedlingstein P, Field CB, Valentini R, Heimann M et al (2004) The vulnerability of the carbon cycle in the 21st century: an assessment of carbon–climate–human interactions. In: Field C, Raupach M (eds) The global carbon cycle: integrating humans, climate and the natural world (SCOPE 62). Island, Washington, DC, pp 45–76Google Scholar
  15. Hansen J, Sato M, Ruedy R, Lacis A, Oinas V (2000) Global warming in the twenty-first century: an alternative scenario. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:9875–9880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hiraike Y, Ikeda M (2009) Descending surface water at the Antarctic marginal ice zone and its contribution to the intermediate water using an ice-ocean model. J Oceanogr 65:587–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Houghton RA (2003) Revised estimates of the annual net flux of carbon to the atmosphere from changes in land use and land management 1850–2000. Tellus 55B:378–390Google Scholar
  18. Inoue YH, Ishii M, Matsueda H, Saito S, Aoyama M, Tokieda T, Midorikawa T, Nemoto K, Kawano T, Asanuma I, Ando K, Yano T, Murata A (2001) Distributions and variations in the partial pressure of CO2 in surface waters (pCO2w) of the central and western equatorial Pacific during the 1997/98 El Niño event. Mar Chem 76:59–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. IPCC (2007a) Summary for policy makers. In: Working Group I (ed) Climate change 2007. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  20. IPCC (2007b) In: Working Group I (ed) Climate change 2007. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 996Google Scholar
  21. IPCC (2007c) In: Working Group III (ed) Climate change 2007. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 851Google Scholar
  22. Keeling CD, Whorf TP (2005) Atmospheric CO2 records from sites in the SIO air sampling network. In: Trends: a compendium of data on global change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge.
  23. Lenton A, Matear RJ (2007) Role of the Southern Annular Mode (SAM) in southern ocean CO2 uptake. Global Biogeochem Cycles 21:GB2016. doi: 10.1029/2006GB002714
  24. Marland G, Boden TA, Andres RJ (2005) Global, regional, and national CO2 emissions. In: Trends: a compendium of data on global change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge.
  25. Nakicenovic N, Swart R (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  26. Nakicenovic N, Kolp P, Riahi K, Kainuma M, Hanaoka T (2006) Assessment of emissions scenarios revisited. Environ Econ Policy Stud 7:137–173Google Scholar
  27. Nordhaus WD, Boyer J (2000) Warming the world: economic models of global warming. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  28. Nowak RS, Ellsworth DS, Smith SD (2004) Functional responses of plants to elevated atmospheric CO2—do photosynthetic and productivity data from FACE experiments support early predictions? New Phytol 162:253–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Oechel WC, Vourtilis GL, Hastings SJ, Zulueta RC, Hinzman L et al (2000) Acclimation of ecosystem CO2 exchange in the Alaskan Arctic in response to decadal climate warming. Nature 406:978–981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pacala S, Socolow R (2004) Stabilization wedges: solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with current technologies. Science 305:968–972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rustad LE, Campbell JL, Marion GM, Norby RJ, Mitchell J et al (2001) A meta-analysis of the response of soil respiration, net nitrogen mineralization, and above ground plant growth to experimental ecosystem warming. Oecologia 126:543–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sabine CL, Feely RA, Gruber N, Key RM, Lee K, Bullister JL, Wanninkhof R, Wong CS, Wallace DWR, Tilbrook B, Millero FJ, Peng TH, Kozyr A, Ono T, Rios AF (2004) The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO2. Science 305:367–371. doi: 10.1126/science.1097403 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sakamoto TT, Hasumi H, Ishii M, Emori S, Suzuki T, Nishimura T, Sumi A (2005) Responses of the Kuroshio and the Kuroshio Extension to global warming in a high-resolution climate model. Geophys Res Lett. 32:L14617. doi: 10.1029/2005GL023384
  34. Sarmiento JL, LeQuéré C, Pacala SW (1995) Limiting future atmospheric carbon dioxide. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 9:121–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Takahashi T, Sutherland SC, Feely RA, Wanninkhof R (2006) Decadal change of the surface water pCO2 in the North Pacific: a synthesis of 35 years of observations. J Geophys Res 111:C07S05. doi: 10.1029/2005JC003074
  36. Valsala V, Maksyutov S (2010) Simulation and assimilation of global ocean pCO2 and air–sea CO2 fluxes using ship observations of surface ocean pCO2 in a simplified biogeochemical offline model. Tellus 62:821–840. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00495.x Google Scholar
  37. Wang YP, Houlton BZ (2009) Nitrogen constraints on terrestrial carbon uptake: implications for the global carbon–climate feedback. Geophys Res Lett 36:L24403. doi: 10.1029/2009GL041009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Oceanographic Society of Japan and Springer 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Environmental ScienceHokkaido UniversitySapporoJapan

Personalised recommendations