School of Earth Sciences - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    pyam: Analysis and visualisation of integrated assessment and macro-energy scenarios
    Huppmann, D ; Gidden, MJ ; Nicholls, Z ; Hörsch, J ; Lamboll, R ; Kishimoto, PN ; Burandt, T ; Fricko, O ; Byers, E ; Kikstra, J ; Brinkerink, M ; Budzinski, M ; Maczek, F ; Zwickl-Bernhard, S ; Welder, L ; Álvarez Quispe, EF ; Smith, CJ (F1000 Research Ltd, 2021-06-28)
    The open-source Python package pyam provides a suite of features and methods for the analysis, validation and visualization of reference data and scenario results generated by integrated assessment models, macro-energy tools and other frameworks in the domain of energy transition, climate change mitigation and sustainable development. It bridges the gap between scenario processing and visualisation solutions that are "hard-wired" to specific modelling frameworks and generic data analysis or plotting packages. The package aims to facilitate reproducibility and reliability of scenario processing, validation and analysis by providing well-tested and documented methods for timeseries aggregation, downscaling and unit conversion. It supports various data formats, including sub-annual resolution using continuous time representation and "representative timeslices". The code base is implemented following best practices of collaborative scientific-software development. This manuscript describes the design principles of the package and the types of data which can be handled. The usefulness of pyam is illustrated by highlighting several recent applications.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    OpenSCM Two Layer Model: A Python implementation of the two-layer climate model
    Nicholls, Z ; Lewis, J (The Open Journal, 2021-06-15)
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    FaIRv2.0.0: a generalized impulse response model for climate uncertainty and future scenario exploration
    Leach, NJ ; Jenkins, S ; Nicholls, Z ; Smith, CJ ; Lynch, J ; Cain, M ; Walsh, T ; Wu, B ; Tsutsui, J ; Allen, MR (COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH, 2021-05-27)
    Abstract. Here we present an update to the FaIR model for use in probabilistic future climate and scenario exploration, integrated assessment, policy analysis, and education. In this update we have focussed on identifying a minimum level of structural complexity in the model. The result is a set of six equations, five of which correspond to the standard impulse response model used for greenhouse gas (GHG) metric calculations in the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report, plus one additional physically motivated equation to represent state-dependent feedbacks on the response timescales of each greenhouse gas cycle. This additional equation is necessary to reproduce non-linearities in the carbon cycle apparent in both Earth system models and observations. These six equations are transparent and sufficiently simple that the model is able to be ported into standard tabular data analysis packages, such as Excel, increasing the potential user base considerably. However, we demonstrate that the equations are flexible enough to be tuned to emulate the behaviour of several key processes within more complex models from CMIP6. The model is exceptionally quick to run, making it ideal for integrating large probabilistic ensembles. We apply a constraint based on the current estimates of the global warming trend to a million-member ensemble, using the constrained ensemble to make scenario-dependent projections and infer ranges for properties of the climate system. Through these analyses, we reaffirm that simple climate models (unlike more complex models) are not themselves intrinsically biased “hot” or “cold”: it is the choice of parameters and how those are selected that determines the model response, something that appears to have been misunderstood in the past. This updated FaIR model is able to reproduce the global climate system response to GHG and aerosol emissions with sufficient accuracy to be useful in a wide range of applications and therefore could be used as a lowest-common-denominator model to provide consistency in different contexts. The fact that FaIR can be written down in just six equations greatly aids transparency in such contexts.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project Phase 2: Synthesizing Earth System Knowledge for Probabilistic Climate Projections
    Nicholls, Z ; Meinshausen, M ; Lewis, J ; Corradi, MR ; Dorheim, K ; Gasser, T ; Gieseke, R ; Hope, AP ; Leach, NJ ; McBride, LA ; Quilcaille, Y ; Rogelj, J ; Salawitch, RJ ; Samset, BH ; Sandstad, M ; Shiklomanov, A ; Skeie, RB ; Smith, CJ ; Smith, SJ ; Su, X ; Tsutsui, J ; Vega-Westhoff, B ; Woodard, DL (AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION, 2021-06)
    Over the last decades, climate science has evolved rapidly across multiple expert domains. Our best tools to capture state-of-the-art knowledge in an internally self-consistent modeling framework are the increasingly complex fully coupled Earth System Models (ESMs). However, computational limitations and the structural rigidity of ESMs mean that the full range of uncertainties across multiple domains are difficult to capture with ESMs alone. The tools of choice are instead more computationally efficient reduced complexity models (RCMs), which are structurally flexible and can span the response dynamics across a range of domain-specific models and ESM experiments. Here we present Phase 2 of the Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project (RCMIP Phase 2), the first comprehensive intercomparison of RCMs that are probabilistically calibrated with key benchmark ranges from specialized research communities. Unsurprisingly, but crucially, we find that models which have been constrained to reflect the key benchmarks better reflect the key benchmarks. Under the low-emissions SSP1-1.9 scenario, across the RCMs, median peak warming projections range from 1.3 to 1.7°C (relative to 1850-1900, using an observationally based historical warming estimate of 0.8°C between 1850-1900 and 1995-2014). Further developing methodologies to constrain these projection uncertainties seems paramount given the international community's goal to contain warming to below 1.5°C above preindustrial in the long-term. Our findings suggest that users of RCMs should carefully evaluate their RCM, specifically its skill against key benchmarks and consider the need to include projections benchmarks either from ESM results or other assessments to reduce divergence in future projections.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6
    Tebaldi, C ; Debeire, K ; Eyring, V ; Fischer, E ; Fyfe, J ; Friedlingstein, P ; Knutti, R ; Lowe, J ; O'Neill, B ; Sanderson, B ; van Vuuren, D ; Riahi, K ; Meinshausen, M ; Nicholls, Z ; Tokarska, KB ; Hurtt, G ; Kriegler, E ; Lamarque, J-F ; Meehl, G ; Moss, R ; Bauer, SE ; Boucher, O ; Brovkin, V ; Byun, Y-H ; Dix, M ; Gualdi, S ; Guo, H ; John, JG ; Kharin, S ; Kim, Y ; Koshiro, T ; Ma, L ; Olivie, D ; Panickal, S ; Qiao, F ; Rong, X ; Rosenbloom, N ; Schupfner, M ; Seferian, R ; Sellar, A ; Semmler, T ; Shi, X ; Song, Z ; Steger, C ; Stouffer, R ; Swart, N ; Tachiiri, K ; Tang, Q ; Tatebe, H ; Voldoire, A ; Volodin, E ; Wyser, K ; Xin, X ; Yang, S ; Yu, Y ; Ziehn, T (COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH, 2021-03-01)
    Abstract. The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) defines and coordinates the main set of future climate projections, based on concentration-driven simulations, within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6). This paper presents a range of its outcomes by synthesizing results from the participating global coupled Earth system models. We limit our scope to the analysis of strictly geophysical outcomes: mainly global averages and spatial patterns of change for surface air temperature and precipitation. We also compare CMIP6 projections to CMIP5 results, especially for those scenarios that were designed to provide continuity across the CMIP phases, at the same time highlighting important differences in forcing composition, as well as in results. The range of future temperature and precipitation changes by the end of the century (2081–2100) encompassing the Tier 1 experiments based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5) and SSP1-1.9 spans a larger range of outcomes compared to CMIP5, due to higher warming (by close to 1.5 ∘C) reached at the upper end of the 5 %–95 % envelope of the highest scenario (SSP5-8.5). This is due to both the wider range of radiative forcing that the new scenarios cover and the higher climate sensitivities in some of the new models compared to their CMIP5 predecessors. Spatial patterns of change for temperature and precipitation averaged over models and scenarios have familiar features, and an analysis of their variations confirms model structural differences to be the dominant source of uncertainty. Models also differ with respect to the size and evolution of internal variability as measured by individual models' initial condition ensemble spreads, according to a set of initial condition ensemble simulations available under SSP3-7.0. These experiments suggest a tendency for internal variability to decrease along the course of the century in this scenario, a result that will benefit from further analysis over a larger set of models. Benefits of mitigation, all else being equal in terms of societal drivers, appear clearly when comparing scenarios developed under the same SSP but to which different degrees of mitigation have been applied. It is also found that a mild overshoot in temperature of a few decades around mid-century, as represented in SSP5-3.4OS, does not affect the end outcome of temperature and precipitation changes by 2100, which return to the same levels as those reached by the gradually increasing SSP4-3.4 (not erasing the possibility, however, that other aspects of the system may not be as easily reversible). Central estimates of the time at which the ensemble means of the different scenarios reach a given warming level might be biased by the inclusion of models that have shown faster warming in the historical period than the observed. Those estimates show all scenarios reaching 1.5 ∘C of warming compared to the 1850–1900 baseline in the second half of the current decade, with the time span between slow and fast warming covering between 20 and 27 years from present. The warming level of 2 ∘C of warming is reached as early as 2039 by the ensemble mean under SSP5-8.5 but as late as the mid-2060s under SSP1-2.6. The highest warming level considered (5 ∘C) is reached by the ensemble mean only under SSP5-8.5 and not until the mid-2090s.