Characterizing transient temperature trajectories for assessing the value of achieving alternative temperature targets

Article

Abstract

Trajectories of policy-driven transient temperatures are reported here for four different maximum temperature targets through 2100 and a “no-policy” baseline because it is they, and their associated manifestations in other impact and risk dimensions, that natural and human and natural systems see in real time as their common future unfolds. It follows that it is they that inform both the reactive and (for human systems) anticipatory responses that embedded decision-makers would contemplate in the future. Median pathways as well as 5th and 95th percentile alternatives for each set of scenarios are reported in decadal increments from 2010 through 2100. Two illustrations (agricultural yields and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “reasons for concern”) are presented to provide provocative context within which to begin to see their potential value across a wide range of applications.

Supplementary material

10584_2017_2100_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2 mb)
ESM 1(DOCX 2024 kb)

References

  1. Fawcett A, Iyer G, Clarke L, Edmonds J, Hultman N, McJeon H, Rogelj J, Schuler R, Alsalam J, Asrar G, Creason J, Jeong M, McFarland J, Mundra A, Shi W (2015) Can Paris pledges avert severe climate change? Science 350:1168–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Hsiang S, Kopp R, Jina A, Rising J, Delgado M, Mohan S, Rasmussen D, Muir-Wood R, Wilson P, Oppenheimer M, Larsen L, Houser T (2017) Estimating economic damage from climate change in the United States. Science 356:1362–1369. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal4369 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2001a) Report of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2001b) Synthesis Report of the Third Assessment Report. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007a) Report of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007b) Synthesis Report of the Fourth Assessment Report. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014a) Report of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014b) Synthesis Report of the Fifth Assessment Report. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Meehl G, Washington W, Arblaster J, Hu A, Teng H, Tebaldi C, Sanderson B, Lamarque J-F, Conley A, Strand W, White J (2012) Climate system response to external forcings and climate change projections in CCSM4. Nat Clim Chang 2:576–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. National Research Council (NRC) (2010) Climate stabilization targets—emissions, concentrations, and impacts over decades to millennia. National Academies Press, Washington DC (www.nas.edu)Google Scholar
  11. O’Neill B, Oppenheimer M, Warren R, Hallegatte S, Kopp R, Portner H, Scholes R, Birkman J, Foden W, Licker R, Mach K, Marbaix P, Mastrandrea M, Price J, Takahashi K, ven Ypersele J-P, Yohe G (2017) IPCC reasons for concern regarding climate change risks. Nat Clim Chang 7:28–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) (2014) Global climate impacts: a cross-sector, multi-model assessment special feature. PNAS 111:3225–3279Google Scholar
  13. Smith JB, Schneider SH, Oppenheimer M, Yohe G, Hare W, Mastrandrea MD, Patwardhan A, Burton I, Corfee-Morlot J, Magadza CHD, Füssel H-M, Pittock AB, Rahman A, Suarez A, van Ypersele J-P (2009) Dangerous climate change: an update of the IPCC reasons for concern. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:4133–4137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Warren R, VanDerWal J, Price J, Welbergen J, Atkinson I, Ramirez-Villegas J, Osborn T, Jarvis A, Shoo L, Williams S, Low J (2013) Quantifying the benefit of early climate change mitigation in avoiding biodiversity loss. Nat Clim Chang 3:678–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Yohe G (2010) “Reasons for concern” (about climate change) in the United States. Clim Chang 99:295–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Huffington Foundation Professor of Economics and Environmental StudiesWesleyan UniversityMiddletownUSA

Personalised recommendations