Search

We learned that global action to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has been lower than predicted, and that under current rates, emissions are projected to rise. Graph I View of the dais during the afternoon plenary, IPCC58 - March 16, 2023. i The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 to inform our governments of the latest climate science - what is happening, why, and what we humans can do about it. For example, carbon capture and storage (CCS) is popular with fossil fuel interests, yet CCS is not proven to scale, maintains fossil fuel dependence, is more expensive, and is both less effective in reducing GHG emissions and less equitable in ownership than renewable energy transformations. [Extracted from the article]

While the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) physical science reports usually assess a handful of future scenarios, the Working Group III contribution on climate mitigation to the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report (AR6 WGIII) assesses hundreds to thousands of future emissions scenarios. A key task in WGIII is to assess the global mean temperature outcomes of these scenarios in a consistent manner, given the challenge that the emissions scenarios from different integrated assessment models (IAMs) come with different sectoral and gas-to-gas coverage and cannot all be assessed consistently by complex Earth system models. In this work, we describe the "climate-assessment" workflow and its methods, including infilling of missing emissions and emissions harmonisation as applied to 1202 mitigation scenarios in AR6 WGIII. We evaluate the global mean temperature projections and effective radiative forcing (ERF) characteristics of climate emulators FaIRv1.6.2 and MAGICCv7.5.3 and use the CICERO simple climate model (CICERO-SCM) for sensitivity analysis. We discuss the implied overshoot severity of the mitigation pathways using overshoot degree years and look at emissions and temperature characteristics of scenarios compatible with one possible interpretation of the Paris Agreement. We find that the lowest class of emissions scenarios that limit global warming to "1.5 ∘ C (with a probability of greater than 50 %) with no or limited overshoot" includes 97 scenarios for MAGICCv7.5.3 and 203 for FaIRv1.6.2. For the MAGICCv7.5.3 results, "limited overshoot" typically implies exceedance of median temperature projections of up to about 0.1 ∘ C for up to a few decades before returning to below 1.5 ∘ C by or before the year 2100. For more than half of the scenarios in this category that comply with three criteria for being "Paris-compatible", including net-zero or net-negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, median temperatures decline by about 0.3–0.4 ∘ C after peaking at 1.5–1.6 ∘ C in 2035–2055. We compare the methods applied in AR6 with the methods used for SR1.5 and discuss their implications. This article also introduces a "climate-assessment" Python package which allows for fully reproducing the IPCC AR6 WGIII temperature assessment. This work provides a community tool for assessing the temperature outcomes of emissions pathways and provides a basis for further work such as extending the workflow to include downscaling of climate characteristics to a regional level and calculating impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Assessment of the influence of human activities on recent, current, and future global and regional climate conditions and extremes has advanced sufficiently to provide a reasonable measure of its impact across the globe. The lack of concurrent adaptation of the design base for load bearing structures results mainly from the absence of a clear signal that climate change will have a significant effect on the climate actions that are accounted for in the structural design basis. The recent IPCC assessment of the physical science basis of climate change reports significant advances in observing and projecting changes in weather and climate extremes due to human influences. This provides an opportunity to reassess projections of future climate action conditions. Whilst the IPCC assessment confirms previous indications that, for example extreme wind will respond moderately globally, improvements in understanding and projecting changes show that trends will be overshadowed by uncertainties. The implication is that the design base will need to account for increasing uncertainties as climate actions are projected into the future, over the service life of existing structures, as well as those designed to current standards. The design base consequently in advance need to reflect continuous changes of existing structures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. Plain Language Summary: The IPCC's latest physical science report, the Working Group 1 Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), was released in August 2021. That report includes an update to the tools used to project the climate outcome of emission scenarios. Here we apply these newly calibrated tools, called earth system model emulators, to the set of scenarios assessed in the IPCC's Special Report on warming of 1.5°C (SR1.5). We find that two compensating changes lead to a remarkable consistency (peak warming projections within 0.1°C) between the projections made by the emulators used in SR1.5 and their descendants used in AR6. First, updates to the historical warming assessment since the SR1.5 (which was based on the IPCC's 2013 physical science report (AR5)) increase future warming projections. However, improved consistency between the emulators and the assessment of the underlying physics, particularly the short‐term warming response to emissions, lowers warming projections by an approximately equivalent amount. Our work reinforces the key messages from the IPCC: limiting warming to around 1.5°C is a great and urgent challenge, and it is up to us to decide whether we pull out all the stops to hold temperatures around 1.5°C or whether we sail on by. Key Points: Emulators used in IPCC Special Report on warming of 1.5°C and Sixth Assessment Report are remarkably consistent, despite their entirely new calibrationsThe consistency is due to two compensating factors: change in assessed historical warming and improvements to emulator calibration methods [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Australian Institute for the Conservation of Cultural Material has published a range of resources that promote environmentally aware collection care and management practices including climate-specific Environmental Guidelines, the Sustainable Collections wiki and the Climate Adaptation resource. The Climate Adaptation resource provides access to 180 maps illustrating potential future climate scenarios for Australia in 2030 and 2090, using the two Representative Concentration Pathways RCP4.5 and RCP8.5. These maps were produced as part of research undertaken in 2019–2020 by Pagliarino and Meredith and supplement those published in volume 41 (issue 1) of the AICCM Bulletin. The release of updated climate change projections in the Sixth Assessment Report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis – precipitated a review of the Climate Adaptation resource to confirm the continued veracity of the maps. This paper provides the results of that assessment, which confirmed the resource's ongoing accuracy and currency. In addition, the paper includes discussion of the new IPCC future climate scenarios of Shared Socioeconomic Pathways, which supersede RCP, and a summary of the state of the climate in Australia with warming, humidity, fire, weather and sea level rise investigated in more detail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific assessments, such as those by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), inform policymakers and the public about the state of scientific evidence and related uncertainties. We studied how experts from different scientific disciplines who were authors of IPCC reports, interpret the uncertainty language recommended in the Guidance Note for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainties. This IPCC guidance note discusses how to use confidence levels to describe the quality of evidence and scientific agreement, as well likelihood terms to describe the probability intervals associated with climate variables. We find that (1) physical science experts were more familiar with the IPCC guidance note than other experts, and they followed it more often; (2) experts' confidence levels increased more with perceptions of evidence than with agreement; (3) experts' estimated probability intervals for climate variables were wider when likelihood terms were presented with "medium confidence" rather than with "high confidence" and when seen in context of IPCC sentences rather than out of context, and were only partly in agreement with the IPCC guidance note. Our findings inform recommendations for communications about scientific evidence, assessments, and related uncertainties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the IPCC's physical science report usually assesses a handful of future scenarios, the IPCC Sixth Assessment Working Group III report (AR6 WGIII) on climate mitigation assesses hundreds to thousands of future emissions scenarios. A key task is to assess the global-mean temperature outcomes of these scenarios in a consistent manner, given the challenge that the emission scenarios from different integrated assessment models come with different sectoral and gas-to-gas coverage and cannot all be assessed consistently by complex Earth System Models. In this work, we describe the "climate assessment" workflow and its methods, including infilling of missing emissions and emissions harmonisation as applied to 1,202 mitigation scenarios in AR6 WGIII. We evaluate the global-mean temperature projections and effective radiative forcing characteristics (ERF) of climate emulators FaIRv1.6.2, MAGICCv7.5.3, and CICERO-SCM, discuss overshoot severity of the mitigation pathways using overshoot degree years, and look at an interpretation of compatibility with the Paris Agreement. We find that the lowest class of emission scenarios that limit global warming to "1.5°C (with a probability of greater than 50%) with no or limited overshoot" includes 90 scenarios for MAGICCv7.5.3, and 196 for FaIRv1.6.2. For the MAGICCv7.5.3 results, "limited overshoot" typically implies exceedance of median temperature projections of up to about 0.1°C for up to a few decades, before returning to below 1.5°C by or before the year 2100. For more than half of the scenarios of this category that comply with three criteria for being "Paris-compatible", including net-zero or net-negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, are projected to see median temperatures decline by about 0.3-0.4°C after peaking at 1.5-1.6°C in 2035-2055. We compare the methods applied in AR6 with the methods used for SR1.5 and discuss the implications. This article also introduces a 'climate-assessment' Python package which allows for fully reproducing the IPCC AR6 WGIII temperature assessment. This work can be the start of a community tool for assessing the temperature outcomes related to emissions pathways, and potential further work extending the workflow from emissions to global climate by downscaling climate characteristics to a regional level and calculating impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I The i Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the enormously detailed quadrennial literature review of climate research that is the Panel's principal output, is at an advanced stage of preparation, with the final Synthesis Report scheduled to be issued in September 2022. B I From Working Group I (pp. 14-15) i b : Compared to 1850-1900, global surface temperature averaged over 2081-2100 is very likely to be higher by 1.0°C to 1.8°C under the very low GHG emissions scenario considered (SSP1-1.9), by 2.1°C to 3.5°C in the intermediate GHG emissions scenario (SSP2-4.5) and by 3.3°C to 5.7°C under the very high GHG emissions scenario (SSP5-8.5). [Extracted from the article]

The Royal Meteorological Society, in partnership with the Grantham Institute, hosted a virtual event on 15 September 2021 to mark the release of the sixth major Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report (AR6) (IPCC, 2021a). She provided a guide to the new scenarios, the use of emulators (simple climate models that emulate Earth System Model results) in AR6, and the inclusion of global climate indicators. She explained the narrowed uncertainty range for climate sensitivity and addressed the crossing time of 1.5 degC, highlighting the agreement between AR6 and SR1.5 (IPCC, 2019). [Extracted from the article]

The article overviews the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report. It mentions graphic approach to quickly glean the major findings on the varied geographical impact of climate change; and also mentions opportunities to consider the most appropriate indicators, technical limitations such as scale, and methods of presentation.