Search

Projections of future carbon sinks and stocks are important because they show how the world's ecosystems will respond to elevated CO2 and changes in climate. Moreover, they are crucial to inform policy decisions around emissions reductions to stay within the global warming levels identified by the Paris Agreement. However, Earth System Models from the 6th Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) show substantial spread in future projections—especially of the terrestrial carbon cycle, leading to a large uncertainty in our knowledge of any remaining carbon budget (RCB). Here we evaluate the global terrestrial carbon cycle projections on a region-by-region basis and compare the global models with regional assessments made by the REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes, Phase 2 activity. Results show that for each region, the CMIP6 multi-model mean is generally consistent with the regional assessment, but substantial cross-model spread exists. Nonetheless, all models perform well in some regions and no region is without some well performing models. This gives confidence that the CMIP6 models can be used to look at future changes in carbon stocks on a regional basis with appropriate model assessment and benchmarking. We find that most regions of the world remain cumulative net sources of CO2 between now and 2100 when considering the balance of fossil-fuels and natural sinks, even under aggressive mitigation scenarios. This paper identifies strengths and weaknesses for each model in terms of its performance over a particular region including how process representation might impact those results and sets the agenda for applying stricter constraints at regional scales to reduce the uncertainty in global projections.

In every IPCC Assessment cycle, a multitude of scenarios are assessed, with different scope and emphasis throughout the various Working Group and Special Reports and their respective chapters. Within the reports, the ambition is to integrate knowledge on possible climate futures across the Working Groups and scientific research domains based on a small set of ‘framing pathways’, such as the so-called RCP pathways from the Fifth IPCC Assessment report (AR5) and the SSP-RCP scenarios in the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). This perspective, initiated by discussions at the IPCC Bangkok workshop in April 2023 on the “Use of Scenarios in AR6 and Subsequent Assessments”, is intended to serve as one of the community contributions to highlight needs for the next generation of framing pathways that is being advanced under the CMIP umbrella for use in the IPCC AR7. Here we suggest a number of policy research objectives that such a set of framing pathways should ideally fulfil, including mitigation needs for meeting the Paris Agreement objectives, the risks associated with carbon removal strategies, the consequences of delay in enacting that mitigation, guidance for adaptation needs, loss and damage, and for achieving mitigation in the wider context of Societal Development goals. Based on this context we suggest that the next generation of climate scenarios for Earth System Models should evolve towards ‘Representative Emission Pathways’ (REPs) and suggest key categories for such pathways. These ‘framing pathways’ should address the most critical mitigation policy and adaptation needs over the next 5–10 years. In our view the most important categories are those relevant in the context of the Paris Agreement long-term goal, specifically an immediate action (low overshoot) 1.5 °C pathway, and a delayed action (high overshoot) 1.5 °C pathway. Two other key categories are a pathway category approximately in line with current (as expressed by 2023) near- and long-term policy objective

The authors regret to inform readers of a typographical error in the last sentence of the conclusion...

Adapting to the impacts of future warming, and in particular the impacts of heatwaves, is an increasingly important challenge. One proposed strategy is land-surface radiation management via crop albedo enhancement. This has been argued to be an effective method of reducing daily hot temperature extremes regionally. However, the influence of crop albedo enhancement on heatwave events, which last three or more days, is yet to be explored and this remains an important knowledge gap. Using a fully coupled earth system model with 10 ensemble members, we show that crop albedo enhancement by up to ＋0.1 reduces the frequency of heatwave days over Europe and North America by 10 to 20 days; with a larger reduction over Europe under a future climate driven by SSP2-4.5. The average temperature anomaly during heatwaves (the magnitude of the event), is reduced by 0.8 °C to 1.2 °C where the albedo was enhanced, but reductions in mean heatwave duration are limited. There was a marked reduction in the mean annual cumulative heatwave intensity across most of Eurasia and North America, ranging from 32 °C to as high as 80 °C in parts of southern Europe. These changes were largely driven by a reduction in net radiation, decreasing the sensible heat flux, which reduces the maximum temperature, and therefore, heatwave frequency and intensity. These changes were largely localised to where the albedo enhancement was applied with no significant changes in atmospheric circulation or precipitation, which presents advantages for implementation. While our albedo perturbation of up to ＋0.1 is large and represents the likely upper limit of what is possible with more reflective crops, and we assume that more reflective crops are grown everywhere and instantly, these results provide useful guidance to policy makers and farmers on the maximum possible benefits of using more reflective crops in limiting the impacts of heatwaves under future climate.

Current greenhouse gas emissions will continue to affect the climate even after we reach net-zero emissions. We must understand how and prepare for a cooling planet. For the last century, the planet has experienced warming due to humanity’s collective, albeit unequal, greenhouse gas emissions. The rise in global-average temperatures has been accompanied by rapidly warming land and slower warming oceans, rising sea levels and shrinking ice coverage. However, with global greenhouse gas emissions hopefully peaking soon and international, and some national and sub-national, targets in place to reach net-zero emissions (that is, a state where anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere are balanced by anthropogenic removal from the atmosphere), a new and very different climate is potentially on the horizon. Net-zero emissions would probably be followed by net-negative emissions (where anthropogenic removal of greenhouse gases exceeds anthropogenic emissions) as policies to support emissions reductions and greater carbon removal progress. If global net-zero greenhouse gas emissions are reached, then global cooling will probably follow. Under net-negative greenhouse gas emissions, this cooling would be even greater.

The Australian Community Climate and Earth System Simulator (ACCESS) has contributed to the World Climate Research Programme’s Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) using two fully coupled model versions (ACCESS-CM2 and ACCESS-ESM1.5) and two ocean–sea-ice model versions (1° and 0.25° resolution versions of ACCESS-OM2). The fully coupled models differ primarily in the configuration and version of their atmosphere components (including the aerosol scheme), with smaller differences in their sea-ice and land model versions. Additionally, ACCESS-ESM1.5 includes biogeochemistry in the land and ocean components and can be run with an interactive carbon cycle. CMIP6 comprises core experiments and associated thematic Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs). This paper provides an overview of the CMIP6 submission, including the methods used for the preparation of input forcing datasets and the post-processing of model output, along with a comprehensive list of experiments performed, detailing their initialisation, duration, ensemble number and computational cost. A small selection of model output is presented, focusing on idealised experiments and their variants at global scale. Differences in the climate simulation of the two coupled models are highlighted. ACCESS-CM2 produces a larger equilibrium climate sensitivity (4.7°C) than ACCESS-ESM1.5 (3.9°C), likely a result of updated atmospheric parameterisation in recent versions of the atmospheric component of ACCESS-CM2. The idealised experiments run with ACCESS-ESM1.5 show that land and ocean carbon fluxes respond to both changing atmospheric CO2 and to changing temperature. ACCESS data submitted to CMIP6 are available from the Earth System Grid Federation (https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.2281 and https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.2288). The information provided in this paper should facilitate easier use of these significant datasets by the broader climate community.

The Australian Community Climate and Earth System Simulator (ACCESS) has contributed to the World Climate Research Programme’s Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) using two fully coupled model versions (ACCESS-CM2 and ACCESS-ESM1.5) and two ocean–sea-ice model versions (1° and 0.25° resolution versions of ACCESS-OM2). The fully coupled models differ primarily in the configuration and version of their atmosphere components (including the aerosol scheme), with smaller differences in their sea-ice and land model versions. Additionally, ACCESS-ESM1.5 includes biogeochemistry in the land and ocean components and can be run with an interactive carbon cycle. CMIP6 comprises core experiments and associated thematic Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs). This paper provides an overview of the CMIP6 submission, including the methods used for the preparation of input forcing datasets and the post-processing of model output, along with a comprehensive list of experiments performed, detailing their initialisation, duration, ensemble number and computational cost. A small selection of model output is presented, focusing on idealised experiments and their variants at global scale. Differences in the climate simulation of the two coupled models are highlighted. ACCESS-CM2 produces a larger equilibrium climate sensitivity (4.7°C) than ACCESS-ESM1.5 (3.9°C), likely a result of updated atmospheric parameterisation in recent versions of the atmospheric component of ACCESS-CM2. The idealised experiments run with ACCESS-ESM1.5 show that land and ocean carbon fluxes respond to both changing atmospheric CO2 and to changing temperature. ACCESS data submitted to CMIP6 are available from the Earth System Grid Federation (https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.2281 and https://doi.org/10.22033/ESGF/CMIP6.2288). The information provided in this paper should facilitate easier use of these significant datasets by the broader climate community.