scholarly journals Partitioning climate projection uncertainty with multiple Large Ensembles and CMIP5/6

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavio Lehner ◽  
Clara Deser ◽  
Nicola Maher ◽  
Jochem Marotzke ◽  
Erich Fischer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Model ◽  
Internal Variability ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Good Representation ◽  
Transient Climate Response ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Large Ensembles ◽  
Robust Separation

<p>Partitioning uncertainty in projections of future climate change into contributions from internal variability, model response uncertainty, and emissions scenarios has historically relied on making assumptions about forced changes in the mean and variability. With the advent of multiple Single-Model Initial-Condition Large Ensembles (SMILEs), these assumptions can be scrutinized, as they allow a more robust separation between sources of uncertainty. Here, we revisit the framework from Hawkins and Sutton (2009) for uncertainty partitioning for temperature and precipitation projections using seven SMILEs and the Climate Model Intercomparison Projects CMIP5 and CMIP6 archives. We also investigate forced changes in variability itself, something that is newly possible with SMILEs. The available SMILEs are shown to be a good representation of the CMIP5 model diversity in many situations, making them a useful tool for interpreting CMIP5. CMIP6 often shows larger absolute and relative model uncertainty than CMIP5, although part of this difference can be reconciled with the higher average transient climate response in CMIP6. This study demonstrates the added value of a collection of SMILEs for quantifying and diagnosing uncertainty in climate projections.</p>

scholarly journals Partitioning climate projection uncertainty with multiple large ensembles and CMIP5/6

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 491-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavio Lehner ◽  
Clara Deser ◽  
Nicola Maher ◽  
Jochem Marotzke ◽  
Erich M. Fischer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coupled Model ◽  
Internal Variability ◽  
Potential Method ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Good Representation ◽  
Transient Climate Response ◽  
Large Ensembles ◽  
Method Bias

Abstract. Partitioning uncertainty in projections of future climate change into contributions from internal variability, model response uncertainty and emissions scenarios has historically relied on making assumptions about forced changes in the mean and variability. With the advent of multiple single-model initial-condition large ensembles (SMILEs), these assumptions can be scrutinized, as they allow a more robust separation between sources of uncertainty. Here, the framework from Hawkins and Sutton (2009) for uncertainty partitioning is revisited for temperature and precipitation projections using seven SMILEs and the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project CMIP5 and CMIP6 archives. The original approach is shown to work well at global scales (potential method bias < 20 %), while at local to regional scales such as British Isles temperature or Sahel precipitation, there is a notable potential method bias (up to 50 %), and more accurate partitioning of uncertainty is achieved through the use of SMILEs. Whenever internal variability and forced changes therein are important, the need to evaluate and improve the representation of variability in models is evident. The available SMILEs are shown to be a good representation of the CMIP5 model diversity in many situations, making them a useful tool for interpreting CMIP5. CMIP6 often shows larger absolute and relative model uncertainty than CMIP5, although part of this difference can be reconciled with the higher average transient climate response in CMIP6. This study demonstrates the added value of a collection of SMILEs for quantifying and diagnosing uncertainty in climate projections.

scholarly journals Partitioning climate projection uncertainty with multiple Large Ensembles and CMIP5/6

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavio Lehner ◽  
Clara Deser ◽  
Nicola Maher ◽  
Jochem Marotzke ◽  
Erich Fischer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Model ◽  
Internal Variability ◽  
Potential Method ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Method Error ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Model Response ◽  
Large Ensembles ◽  
Emissions Scenarios ◽  
Robust Separation

Abstract. Partitioning uncertainty in projections of future climate change into contributions from internal variability, model response uncertainty, and emissions scenarios has historically relied on making assumptions about forced changes in the mean and variability. With the advent of multiple Single-Model Initial-Condition Large Ensembles (SMILEs), these assumptions can be scrutinized, as they allow a more robust separation between sources of uncertainty. Here, the iconic framework from Hawkins and Sutton (2009) for uncertainty partitioning is revisited for temperature and precipitation projections using seven SMILEs and the Climate Model Intercomparison Projects CMIP5 and CMIP6 archives. The original approach is shown to work well at global scales (potential method error

Quantifying uncertainty in projections of future European climate: a multi-model multi-method approach

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukas Brunner ◽  
Carol McSweeney ◽  
Daniel Befort ◽  
Chris O'Reilly ◽  
Ben Booth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Model ◽  
Probability Distributions ◽  
Internal Variability ◽  
Precipitation Change ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
European Climate ◽  
Climate Model Simulations ◽  
Quantifying Uncertainty

&lt;p&gt;Political decisions, adaptation planning, and impact assessments need reliable estimates of future climate change and related uncertainties. Different approaches to constrain, filter, or weight climate model simulations into probabilistic projections have been proposed to provide such estimates. Here six methods are applied to European climate projections using a consistent framework in order to allow a quantitative comparison. &amp;#160;Focus is given to summer temperature and precipitation change in three different spatial regimes in Europe in the period 2041-2060 relative to 1995-2014. The analysis draws on projections from several large initial condition ensembles, the CMIP5 multi-model ensemble, and perturbed physics ensembles, all using the high-emission scenario RCP8.5. &amp;#160;&lt;br&gt;The methods included are diverse in their approach to quantifying uncertainty, and include those which apply weighting schemes based on baseline performance and inter-model relationships, so-called ASK (Allen, Stott and Kettleborough) techniques which use optimal fingerprinting to scale the scale the response to external forcings, to those found in observations and Bayesian approaches to estimating probability distributions. Some of the key differences between methods are the uncertainties covered, the treatment of internal variability, and variables and regions used to inform the methods. In spite of these considerable methodological differences, the median projection from the multi-model methods agree on a statistically significant increase in temperature by mid-century by about 2.5&amp;#176;C in the European average. The estimates of spread, in contrast, differ substantially between methods. Part of this large difference in the spread reflects the fact that different methods attempt to capture different sources of uncertainty, and some are more comprehensive in this respect than others. This study, therefore, highlights the importance of providing clear context about how different methods affect the distribution of projections, particularly the in the upper and lower percentiles that are of interest to 'risk averse' stakeholders. Methods find less agreement in precipitation change with most methods indicating a slight increase in northern Europe and a drying in the central and Mediterranean regions, but with considerably different amplitudes. Further work is needed to understand how the underlying differences between methods lead to such diverse results for precipitation.&amp;#160;&lt;/p&gt;

scholarly journals Comparing Methods to Constrain Future European Climate Projections Using a Consistent Framework

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (20) ◽  
pp. 8671-8692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukas Brunner ◽  
Carol McSweeney ◽  
Andrew P. Ballinger ◽  
Daniel J. Befort ◽  
Marianna Benassi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Model ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
European Climate ◽  
Large Ensembles ◽  
High Emission ◽  
High Emission Scenario ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Method Agreement

AbstractPolitical decisions, adaptation planning, and impact assessments need reliable estimates of future climate change and related uncertainties. To provide these estimates, different approaches to constrain, filter, or weight climate model projections into probabilistic distributions have been proposed. However, an assessment of multiple such methods to, for example, expose cases of agreement or disagreement, is often hindered by a lack of coordination, with methods focusing on a variety of variables, time periods, regions, or model pools. Here, a consistent framework is developed to allow a quantitative comparison of eight different methods; focus is given to summer temperature and precipitation change in three spatial regimes in Europe in 2041–60 relative to 1995–2014. The analysis draws on projections from several large ensembles, the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble, and perturbed physics ensembles, all using the high-emission scenario RCP8.5. The methods’ key features are summarized, assumptions are discussed, and resulting constrained distributions are presented. Method agreement is found to be dependent on the investigated region but is generally higher for median changes than for the uncertainty ranges. This study, therefore, highlights the importance of providing clear context about how different methods affect the assessed uncertainty—in particular, the upper and lower percentiles that are of interest to risk-averse stakeholders. The comparison also exposes cases in which diverse lines of evidence lead to diverging constraints; additional work is needed to understand how the underlying differences between methods lead to such disagreements and to provide clear guidance to users.

scholarly journals More accurate quantification of model-to-model agreement in externally forced climatic responses over the coming century

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Maher ◽  
Scott B. Power ◽  
Jochem Marotzke
Keyword(s):  
Temporal Variability ◽  
Internal Variability ◽  
Forced Response ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Large Ensembles ◽  
Model Ensembles ◽  
Climatic Responses ◽  
Precipitation Changes ◽  
Accurate Quantification

AbstractSeparating how model-to-model differences in the forced response (UMD) and internal variability (UIV) contribute to the uncertainty in climate projections is important, but challenging. Reducing UMD increases confidence in projections, while UIV characterises the range of possible futures that might occur purely by chance. Separating these uncertainties is limited in traditional multi-model ensembles because most models have only a small number of realisations; furthermore, some models are not independent. Here, we use six largely independent single model initial-condition large ensembles to separate the contributions of UMD and UIV in projecting 21st-century changes of temperature, precipitation, and their temporal variability under strong forcing (RCP8.5). We provide a method that produces similar results using traditional multi-model archives. While UMD is larger than UIV for both temperature and precipitation changes, UIV is larger than UMD for the changes in temporal variability of both temperature and precipitation, between 20° and 80° latitude in both hemispheres. Over large regions and for all variables considered here except temporal temperature variability, models agree on the sign of the forced response whereas they disagree widely on the magnitude. Our separation method can readily be extended to other climate variables.

scholarly journals Emerging Anthropogenic Influences on the Southcentral Alaska Temperature and Precipitation Extremes and Related Fires in 2019

Land ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 82
Author(s):  
Uma S. Bhatt ◽  
Rick T. Lader ◽  
John E. Walsh ◽  
Peter A. Bieniek ◽  
Richard Thoman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Model ◽  
Simulation Analysis ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Fire Risk ◽  
Internal Variability ◽  
Fire Season ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Southcentral Alaska ◽  
Meteorological Observations ◽  
Climate Model Simulations

The late-season extreme fire activity in Southcentral Alaska during 2019 was highly unusual and consequential. Firefighting operations had to be extended by a month in 2019 due to the extreme conditions of hot summer temperature and prolonged drought. The ongoing fires created poor air quality in the region containing most of Alaska’s population, leading to substantial impacts to public health. Suppression costs totaled over $70 million for Southcentral Alaska. This study’s main goals are to place the 2019 season into historical context, provide an attribution analysis, and assess future changes in wildfire risk in the region. The primary tools are meteorological observations and climate model simulations from the NCAR CESM Large Ensemble (LENS). The 2019 fire season in Southcentral Alaska included the hottest and driest June–August season over the 1979–2019 period. The LENS simulation analysis suggests that the anthropogenic signal of increased fire risk had not yet emerged in 2019 because of the CESM’s internal variability, but that the anthropogenic signal will emerge by the 2040–2080 period. The effect of warming temperatures dominates the effect of enhanced precipitation in the trend towards increased fire risk.

scholarly journals The Interpretation and Use of Biases in Decadal Climate Predictions

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (8) ◽  
pp. 2931-2947 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ed Hawkins ◽  
Buwen Dong ◽  
Jon Robson ◽  
Rowan Sutton ◽  
Doug Smith
Keyword(s):  
Climate Model ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Internal Variability ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Start Time ◽  
Transient Climate Response ◽  
Global Mean Temperature ◽  
Decadal Climate ◽  
Highly Correlated ◽  
Hadley Centre

Abstract Decadal climate predictions exhibit large biases, which are often subtracted and forgotten. However, understanding the causes of bias is essential to guide efforts to improve prediction systems, and may offer additional benefits. Here the origins of biases in decadal predictions are investigated, including whether analysis of these biases might provide useful information. The focus is especially on the lead-time-dependent bias tendency. A “toy” model of a prediction system is initially developed and used to show that there are several distinct contributions to bias tendency. Contributions from sampling of internal variability and a start-time-dependent forcing bias can be estimated and removed to obtain a much improved estimate of the true bias tendency, which can provide information about errors in the underlying model and/or errors in the specification of forcings. It is argued that the true bias tendency, not the total bias tendency, should be used to adjust decadal forecasts. The methods developed are applied to decadal hindcasts of global mean temperature made using the Hadley Centre Coupled Model, version 3 (HadCM3), climate model, and it is found that this model exhibits a small positive bias tendency in the ensemble mean. When considering different model versions, it is shown that the true bias tendency is very highly correlated with both the transient climate response (TCR) and non–greenhouse gas forcing trends, and can therefore be used to obtain observationally constrained estimates of these relevant physical quantities.

scholarly journals Projecting malaria hazard from climate change in eastern Africa using large ensembles to estimate uncertainty

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1s) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Leedale ◽  
Adrian M. Tompkins ◽  
Cyril Caminade ◽  
Anne E. Jones ◽  
Grigory Nikulin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Malaria Transmission ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Eastern Africa ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Model Ensemble ◽  
East African Community ◽  
Recent Climate

The effect of climate change on the spatiotemporal dynamics of malaria transmission is studied using an unprecedented ensemble of climate projections, employing three diverse bias correction and downscaling techniques, in order to partially account for uncertainty in climate- driven malaria projections. These large climate ensembles drive two dynamical and spatially explicit epidemiological malaria models to provide future hazard projections for the focus region of eastern Africa. While the two malaria models produce very distinct transmission patterns for the recent climate, their response to future climate change is similar in terms of sign and spatial distribution, with malaria transmission moving to higher altitudes in the East African Community (EAC) region, while transmission reduces in lowland, marginal transmission zones such as South Sudan. The climate model ensemble generally projects warmer and wetter conditions over EAC. The simulated malaria response appears to be driven by temperature rather than precipitation effects. This reduces the uncertainty due to the climate models, as precipitation trends in tropical regions are very diverse, projecting both drier and wetter conditions with the current state-of-the-art climate model ensemble. The magnitude of the projected changes differed considerably between the two dynamical malaria models, with one much more sensitive to climate change, highlighting that uncertainty in the malaria projections is also associated with the disease modelling approach.

scholarly journals Understanding drivers of glacier-length variability over the last millennium

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 1645-1662
Author(s):  
Alan Huston ◽  
Nicholas Siler ◽  
Gerard H. Roe ◽  
Erin Pettit ◽  
Nathan J. Steiger
Keyword(s):  
Climate Variability ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Internal Variability ◽  
Forced Response ◽  
Last Millennium ◽  
External Forcing ◽  
Climate History ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Glacier Length

Abstract. Changes in glacier length reflect the integrated response to local fluctuations in temperature and precipitation resulting from both external forcing (e.g., volcanic eruptions or anthropogenic CO2) and internal climate variability. In order to interpret the climate history reflected in the glacier moraine record, the influence of both sources of climate variability must therefore be considered. Here we study the last millennium of glacier-length variability across the globe using a simple dynamic glacier model, which we force with temperature and precipitation time series from a 13-member ensemble of simulations from a global climate model. The ensemble allows us to quantify the contributions to glacier-length variability from external forcing (given by the ensemble mean) and internal variability (given by the ensemble spread). Within this framework, we find that internal variability is the predominant source of length fluctuations for glaciers with a shorter response time (less than a few decades). However, for glaciers with longer response timescales (more than a few decades) external forcing has a greater influence than internal variability. We further find that external forcing also dominates when the response of glaciers from widely separated regions is averaged. Single-forcing simulations indicate that, for this climate model, most of the forced response over the last millennium, pre-anthropogenic warming, has been driven by global-scale temperature change associated with volcanic aerosols.

scholarly journals Bayesian estimation of Earth's climate sensitivity and transient climate response from observational warming and heat content datasets

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 709-723
Author(s):  
Philip Goodwin ◽  
B. B. Cael
Keyword(s):  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Future Climate ◽  
Climate Feedback ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Climate Response ◽  
Ocean Heat Uptake ◽  
Transient Climate Response ◽  
Posterior Probability Distribution ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. Future climate change projections, impacts, and mitigation targets are directly affected by how sensitive Earth's global mean surface temperature is to anthropogenic forcing, expressed via the climate sensitivity (S) and transient climate response (TCR). However, the S and TCR are poorly constrained, in part because historic observations and future climate projections consider the climate system under different response timescales with potentially different climate feedback strengths. Here, we evaluate S and TCR by using historic observations of surface warming, available since the mid-19th century, and ocean heat uptake, available since the mid-20th century, to constrain a model with independent climate feedback components acting over multiple response timescales. Adopting a Bayesian approach, our prior uses a constrained distribution for the instantaneous Planck feedback combined with wide-ranging uniform distributions of the strengths of the fast feedbacks (acting over several days) and multi-decadal feedbacks. We extract posterior distributions by applying likelihood functions derived from different combinations of observational datasets. The resulting TCR distributions when using two preferred combinations of historic datasets both find a TCR of 1.5 (1.3 to 1.8 at 5–95 % range) ∘C. We find the posterior probability distribution for S for our preferred dataset combination evolves from S of 2.0 (1.6 to 2.5) ∘C on a 20-year response timescale to S of 2.3 (1.4 to 6.4) ∘C on a 140-year response timescale, due to the impact of multi-decadal feedbacks. Our results demonstrate how multi-decadal feedbacks allow a significantly higher upper bound on S than historic observations are otherwise consistent with.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document