DOCSLIB.ORG

Volume 1: Climate Science and Data Issues Raised by Petitioners

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Volume 1: Climate Science and Data Issues Raised by Petitioners EPA’s Response to the Petitions to Reconsider the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act Volume 1: Climate Science and Data Issues Raised by Petitioners U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Atmospheric Programs Climate Change Division Washington, D.C. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Climate Science and Data Issues Raised by Petitioners ...................................................6 1.1. Validity of Paleoclimate Temperature Reconstructions and Related Issues ....................6 1.1.1 The “Divergence Issue” in Paleoclimate Reconstructions .....................................6 1.1.2 Background..............................................................................................................7 1.1.3 Assessment of the Evidence Provided by Petitioners Regarding the Climate Reconstructions ..........................................................................................9 1.1.4 Assessment of the Evidence Provided by the Petitioners of Intentional Data Manipulation Regarding Tree Ring Data and the MWP..............................22 1.1.5 Assessment of Petitioners’ Argument That the MWP May Have Been Warmer Than Present Temperatures.....................................................................24 1.1.6 Assessment of the Petitioners’ Argument that Questions About the MWP and Paleoclimate Reconstructions Limit Current Ability to Attribute Present Warming to Humans.................................................................................26 1.1.7 Summary .............................................................................................................31 1.2 Attribution of Recent Temperature Trends and Models.................................................32 1.2.1 The Validity of the Human “Fingerprint” in the Vertical Temperature Structure of the Atmosphere Over the Tropics...............................................................32 1.2.1.1 Background............................................................................................................32 1.2.1.2 Assessment of the Arguments Regarding the Vertical Temperature Structure Over the Tropics.........................................................................33 1.2.2 Global Temperature Trends Over the Last Decade and Implications for Attribution of These Trends to GHGs ....................................................................35 1.2.2.1 Background................................................................................................35 1.2.2.2 Assessment of Arguments Regarding Global Temperature Trends Over the Last Decade and Implications for Attribution of These Trends to GHGs .........................................................................................36 1.2.3 Climate Model Issues Raised by Petitions.............................................................50 1.2.4 Summary ................................................................................................................58 1.3. Validity of the HadCRUT Temperature Record.............................................................59 1.3.1 Overview ................................................................................................................59 1.3.2 Scientific Background on Surface Temperature Records and Underlying Datasets..................................................................................................................60 1.3.3 Responses to Petitioners’ Arguments Regarding the Validity of CRU Data.........65 1.3.3.1 Alleged Destruction of Raw Data ..............................................................66 1.3.3.2 Alleged Data Manipulation.......................................................................70 1.3.3.3 “Harry Read Me” file and other code.......................................................73 1.3.3.4 Claims of Selective Use of Data From Russian Weather Stations.............89 1.3.4 Claims of Flawed Approach to Correct for Urban Heat Island (UHI) Effects.....................................................................................................................90 1.3.5 Alleged Dependence of IPCC Conclusions on the HadCRUT temperature record.....................................................................................................................92 1.3.6 Summary ................................................................................................................96 2 1.4 Validity of NOAA and NASA Temperature Records ....................................................97 1.4.1 Overview ................................................................................................................97 1.4.2 Background on the Collection and Analysis of Surface Temperature Data..........97 1.4.3 The Petitioners’ Arguments and EPA Responses ..................................................99 1.4.3.1 Assessment of Issues Related to Alleged Station Dropout and Inappropriate Extrapolation......................................................................99 1.4.3.2 Issues Raised With Respect to Adjustments for the UHI Effect ...............106 1.4.3.3 Issues Raised in Additional Literature Provided by Petitioners..............116 1.4.3.4 Petitioners’ Allegations Regarding Data Adjustments at Specific Stations.....................................................................................................118 1.4.3.5 Allegations Regarding the Independence of NOAA, NASA, and HadCRUT Temperature Records.............................................................127 1.4.3.6 Additional Issues Regarding Allegations of Manipulation of Data........131 1.4.4 Summary ..............................................................................................................133 1.5 Implications of New Studies and Data Submitted by the Petitioners ...........................135 1.5.1 Overview ..............................................................................................................135 1.5.2 Implications of a New Study on Stratospheric Water Vapor ............................135 1.5.3 Implications of Material Indicating That CO2 Is Not Well Mixed in the Atmosphere and That the Airborne Fraction of CO2 Has Not Changed .............136 1.5.4 Implications of New Tropical Cyclone Studies....................................................142 1.5.5 Implications of New Studies on the Statistical Significance of Increases in Antarctic Sea Ice..................................................................................................144 1.5.6 Implications of Recent Data on Observational Snow Cover Trends ...................146 1.5.7 Petitioners Claim That EPA Ignored a Satellite Dataset ....................................151 1.5.8 Summary ..............................................................................................................152 References....................................................................................................................................153 3 ACRONYMS °C degrees Celsius °F degrees Fahrenheit AIRS Atmospheric Infrared Sounder AMS American Meteorological Society AOGCM Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Models AR4 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report BOM Australian Bureau of Meteorology CCSP U.S. Climate Change Science Program CH4 methane cm centimeter CDIAC Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center CMIP Coupled Model Intercomparison Project CO2 carbon dioxide CRU Climatic Research Unit EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FOIA Freedom of Information Act GHCN Global Historical Climatology Network GHG greenhouse gases GISS Goddard Institute for Space Studies (NASA) GSL Global Snow Laboratory (Rutgers Universitry) IAC InterAcademy Council IEA Institute of Economic Analysis IISD International Institute for Sustainable Development IJC International Journal of Climatology IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IQA Information Quality Act LIA Little Ice Age MET United Kingdom Meteorological Office MWP Medieval Warm Period NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NCAR National Center for Atmospheric Research NCDC National Climatic Data Center NIWA National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research NMS National Meteorological Station NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NRC National Research Council NSIDC U.S. National and Snow and Ice Data Center ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency RTC Response to Comments RTP Response to Petitions SAB Scientific Advisory Board SALR saturated adiabatic lapse rate TSD Technical Support Document 4 UAH University of Alabama–Huntsville UCAR University Corporation for Atmospheric Research UHI urban heat island UK United Kingdom USGCRP U.S. Global Change Research Program USHCN United States Historical Climatology Network W/m2 watts per meter squared WMO World Meteorological Organization WWR World Weather Reports 5 1.0 Climate Science and Data Issues Raised by Petitioners 1.1. Validity of Paleoclimate Temperature Reconstructions and Related Issues 1.1.1 The “Divergence Issue” in Paleoclimate Reconstructions A number of petitioners (the Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Peabody Energy, the Southeastern Legal Foundation, the State of Texas, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute) challenge the validity of the paleoclimate reconstructions of the temperatures of the past 1,000 and 10,000 years, as summarized in the assessment literature.1 Many of the issues they raise are similar to comments EPA
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Public Lands
    The Climate Report 2020: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Public Lands As the world works to respond to the dire regulations meant to protect the public and the warnings issued last fall by the United Nations environment from these exact decisions. New Environment Programme, the Trump policies have made it cheaper and easier for administration continues to open up as much fossil energy corporations to gain and hold of our shared public lands as possible to fossil control of public lands. And they have hidden fuel extraction.1 And while doing so, the federal from public view the implications of these government continues to keep the public (aka decisions for taxpayers and the planet. the owners of these resources) in the dark on This report seeks to pull the curtain back on the mounting greenhouse gas emissions that this situation and shed light on the range of would result from drilling on our public lands. potential climate consequences of these At the same time, we’ve seen this leasing decisions. administration water down policies and 1 UN. 26 Nov. 2019. stories/press-release/cut-global-emissions-76- https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and- percent-every-year-next-decade-meet-15degc Key Takeaways: The federal government cannot manage development of these leases could be as what it does not measure, yet the Trump high as 6.6 billion MT CO2e. administration is actively seeking to These leasing decisions have significant suppress disclosure of climate emissions and long-term ramifications for our climate from fossil energy leases on public lands. and our ability to stave off the worst The leases issued during the Trump impacts of global warming.
    [Show full text]
  • Meteorology Climate
    Meteorology: Climate • Climate is the third topic in the B-Division Science Olympiad Meteorology Event. • Topics rotate annually so a middle school participant may receive a comprehensive course of instruction in meteorology during this three-year cycle. • Sequence: 1. Climate (2006) 2. Everyday Weather (2007) 3. Severe Storms (2008) Weather versus Climate Weather occurs in the troposphere from day to day and week to week and even year to year. It is the state of the atmosphere at a particular location and moment in time. http://weathereye.kgan.com/cadet/cl imate/climate_vs.html http://apollo.lsc.vsc.edu/classes/me t130/notes/chapter1/wea_clim.html Weather versus Climate Climate is the sum of weather trends over long periods of time (centuries or even thousands of years). http://calspace.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/ climatechange1/07_1.shtml Weather versus Climate The nature of weather and climate are determined by many of the same elements. The most important of these are: 1. Temperature. Daily extremes in temperature and average annual temperatures determine weather over the short term; temperature tendencies determine climate over the long term. 2. Precipitation: including type (snow, rain, ground fog, etc.) and amount 3. Global circulation patterns: both oceanic and atmospheric 4. Continentiality: presence or absence of large land masses 5. Astronomical factors: including precession, axial tilt, eccen- tricity of Earth’s orbit, and variable solar output 6. Human impact: including green house gas emissions, ozone layer degradation, and deforestation http://www.ecn.ac.uk/Education/factors_affecting_climate.htm http://www.necci.sr.unh.edu/necci-report/NERAch3.pdf http://www.bbm.me.uk/portsdown/PH_731_Milank.htm Natural Climatic Variability Natural climatic variability refers to naturally occurring factors that affect global temperatures.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change and Human Health: Risks and Responses
    Climate change and human health RISKS AND RESPONSES Editors A.J. McMichael The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia D.H. Campbell-Lendrum London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom C.F. Corvalán World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland K.L. Ebi World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, European Centre for Environment and Health, Rome, Italy A.K. Githeko Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya J.D. Scheraga US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA A. Woodward University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION GENEVA 2003 WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data Climate change and human health : risks and responses / editors : A. J. McMichael . [et al.] 1.Climate 2.Greenhouse effect 3.Natural disasters 4.Disease transmission 5.Ultraviolet rays—adverse effects 6.Risk assessment I.McMichael, Anthony J. ISBN 92 4 156248 X (NLM classification: WA 30) ©World Health Organization 2003 All rights reserved. Publications of the World Health Organization can be obtained from Marketing and Dis- semination, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland (tel: +41 22 791 2476; fax: +41 22 791 4857; email: [email protected]). Requests for permission to reproduce or translate WHO publications—whether for sale or for noncommercial distribution—should be addressed to Publications, at the above address (fax: +41 22 791 4806; email: [email protected]). The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Models and Their Evaluation
    8 Climate Models and Their Evaluation Coordinating Lead Authors: David A. Randall (USA), Richard A. Wood (UK) Lead Authors: Sandrine Bony (France), Robert Colman (Australia), Thierry Fichefet (Belgium), John Fyfe (Canada), Vladimir Kattsov (Russian Federation), Andrew Pitman (Australia), Jagadish Shukla (USA), Jayaraman Srinivasan (India), Ronald J. Stouffer (USA), Akimasa Sumi (Japan), Karl E. Taylor (USA) Contributing Authors: K. AchutaRao (USA), R. Allan (UK), A. Berger (Belgium), H. Blatter (Switzerland), C. Bonfi ls (USA, France), A. Boone (France, USA), C. Bretherton (USA), A. Broccoli (USA), V. Brovkin (Germany, Russian Federation), W. Cai (Australia), M. Claussen (Germany), P. Dirmeyer (USA), C. Doutriaux (USA, France), H. Drange (Norway), J.-L. Dufresne (France), S. Emori (Japan), P. Forster (UK), A. Frei (USA), A. Ganopolski (Germany), P. Gent (USA), P. Gleckler (USA), H. Goosse (Belgium), R. Graham (UK), J.M. Gregory (UK), R. Gudgel (USA), A. Hall (USA), S. Hallegatte (USA, France), H. Hasumi (Japan), A. Henderson-Sellers (Switzerland), H. Hendon (Australia), K. Hodges (UK), M. Holland (USA), A.A.M. Holtslag (Netherlands), E. Hunke (USA), P. Huybrechts (Belgium), W. Ingram (UK), F. Joos (Switzerland), B. Kirtman (USA), S. Klein (USA), R. Koster (USA), P. Kushner (Canada), J. Lanzante (USA), M. Latif (Germany), N.-C. Lau (USA), M. Meinshausen (Germany), A. Monahan (Canada), J.M. Murphy (UK), T. Osborn (UK), T. Pavlova (Russian Federationi), V. Petoukhov (Germany), T. Phillips (USA), S. Power (Australia), S. Rahmstorf (Germany), S.C.B. Raper (UK), H. Renssen (Netherlands), D. Rind (USA), M. Roberts (UK), A. Rosati (USA), C. Schär (Switzerland), A. Schmittner (USA, Germany), J. Scinocca (Canada), D. Seidov (USA), A.G.
    [Show full text]
  • Sam White the Real Little Ice Age Between C.1300 and C.1850 A.D
    Journal of Interdisciplinary History, xliv:3 (Winter, 2014), 327–352. THE REAL LITTLE ICE AGE Sam White The Real Little Ice Age Between c.1300 and c.1850 a.d. the world became, on average, slightly but signiªcantly colder. The change varied over time and space, and its causes remain un- certain. Nevertheless, this cooling constitutes a meaningful climate event, with signiªcant historical consequences. Both the cooling trend and its effects on humans appear to have been particularly Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/jinh/article-pdf/44/3/327/1706251/jinh_a_00574.pdf by guest on 28 September 2021 acute from the late sixteenth to the late seventeenth century in much of the Northern Hemisphere. This article explains why climatologists and historians are conªdent that these changes occurred. On close examination, the objections raised in this issue of the journal by Kelly and Ó Gráda turn out to be entirely unfounded. The proxy data for early mod- ern global cooling (such as tree rings and ice cores) are robust, and written weather descriptions and observations of physical phenom- ena (such as glacial movements and river freezings) by and large of- fer independent conªrmation. Kelly and Ó Gráda’s proposed alter- native measures of climate and climate change suffer from serious ºaws. As we review the evidence and refute their criticisms, it will become clear just how solid the case for the Little Ice Age (lia) has become. the case for the little ice age The evidence for early modern global cooling comes, ªrst and foremost, from extensive research into physical proxies, including ice cores, tree rings, corals, and speleothems (stalagmites and stalactites).
    [Show full text]
  • Blue Intensity for Dendroclimatology: Should We Have the Blues?
    Dendrochronologia 32 (2014) 191–204 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Dendrochronologia jou rnal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/dendro ORIGINAL ARTICLE Blue intensity for dendroclimatology: Should we have the blues? Experiments from Scotland a,∗ b c c Milosˇ Rydval , Lars-Åke Larsson , Laura McGlynn , Björn E. Gunnarson , d d a Neil J. Loader , Giles H.F. Young , Rob Wilson a School of Geography and Geosciences, University of St Andrews, UK b Cybis Elektronik & Data AB, Saltsjöbaden, Sweden c Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden d Department of Geography, Swansea University, Swansea, UK a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: Blue intensity (BI) has the potential to provide information on past summer temperatures of a similar Received 1 April 2014 quality to maximum latewood density (MXD), but at a substantially reduced cost. This paper provides Accepted 27 April 2014 a methodological guide to the generation of BI data using a new and affordable BI measurement sys- tem; CooRecorder. Focussing on four sites in the Scottish Highlands from a wider network of 42 sites Keywords: developed for the Scottish Pine Project, BI and MXD data from Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) were used Blue intensity to facilitate a direct comparison between these parameters. A series of experiments aimed at identify- Maximum latewood density ing and addressing the limitations of BI suggest that while some potential limitations exist, these can Scots pine Dendroclimatology be minimised by adhering to appropriate BI generation protocols. The comparison of BI data produced using different resin-extraction methods (acetone vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Cryosphere: a Kingdom of Anomalies and Diversity
    Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 6535–6542, 2018 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-6535-2018 © Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Cryosphere: a kingdom of anomalies and diversity Vladimir Melnikov1,2,3, Viktor Gennadinik1, Markku Kulmala1,4, Hanna K. Lappalainen1,4,5, Tuukka Petäjä1,4, and Sergej Zilitinkevich1,4,5,6,7,8 1Institute of Cryology, Tyumen State University, Tyumen, Russia 2Industrial University of Tyumen, Tyumen, Russia 3Earth Cryosphere Institute, Tyumen Scientific Center SB RAS, Tyumen, Russia 4Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research (INAR), Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland 5Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland 6Faculty of Radio-Physics, University of Nizhny Novgorod, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia 7Faculty of Geography, University of Moscow, Moscow, Russia 8Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia Correspondence: Hanna K. Lappalainen (hanna.k.lappalainen@helsinki.fi) Received: 17 November 2017 – Discussion started: 12 January 2018 Revised: 20 March 2018 – Accepted: 26 March 2018 – Published: 8 May 2018 Abstract. The cryosphere of the Earth overlaps with the 1 Introduction atmosphere, hydrosphere and lithosphere over vast areas ◦ with temperatures below 0 C and pronounced H2O phase changes. In spite of its strong variability in space and time, Nowadays the Earth system is facing the so-called “Grand the cryosphere plays the role of a global thermostat, keeping Challenges”. The rapidly growing population needs fresh air the thermal regime on the Earth within rather narrow limits, and water, more food and more energy. Thus humankind suf- affording continuation of the conditions needed for the main- fers from climate change, deterioration of the air, water and tenance of life.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement Climate Change Greenhouse Effect
    Western Region Technical Attachment No. 91-07 February 19, 1991 STATEMENT ON CLIMATE. CHANGE AND THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT STATEMENT ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT by REGIONAL CLIMATE CENTERS High Plains Climate Center· University of Nebraska Midwestern Climate Center • Illinois State Water Survey Northeast Regional Climate Center - Cornell University Southern Regional Climate Center • Louisiana State University Southeastern Regional Climate Center • South Carolina Water Commission "'estern Regional Climate Center - Desert Research Institute March 1990 STATEMENT ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT by Regional Climate Centers The Issue Many scientists have issued claims of future global climate changes towards warmer conditions as a result of the ever increasing global release of Carbon Dioxide (C02) and other trace gases from the burning of fossil fuels and from deforestation. The nation experienced an unexpected and severe drought in 1988 which continued through 1989 in parts of the western United States.Is there a connection between these two atmospheric issues? Was the highly unusual 1988-89 drought the first symptom of the climate change atmospheric scientists had been talking about for the past 10 years? Most of the scientific community say "no." The 1988 drought was probably not tied to the ever increasing atmospheric burden of our waste gases. The 1988 drought fits within the historical range of climatic extremes over the past 100 years. Regardless, global climate. change due to the greenhouse effect is an issue of growing national and international concern. It joins the acid rain and ozone layer issues as major atmospheric problems arising primarily from human activities. The term "Greenhouse Effect" derives from the loose analogy between the behavior of the absorbing trace gases in the atmosphere and the window glass in a greenhouse.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change: Examining the Processes Used to Create Science and Policy, Hearing
    CLIMATE CHANGE: EXAMINING THE PROCESSES USED TO CREATE SCIENCE AND POLICY HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION THURSDAY, MARCH 31, 2011 Serial No. 112–09 Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 65–306PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HON. RALPH M. HALL, Texas, Chair F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas Wisconsin JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California DANA ROHRABACHER, California ZOE LOFGREN, California ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland DAVID WU, Oregon FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma BRAD MILLER, North Carolina JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois W. TODD AKIN, Missouri GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia BEN R. LUJA´ N, New Mexico SANDY ADAMS, Florida PAUL D. TONKO, New York BENJAMIN QUAYLE, Arizona JERRY MCNERNEY, California CHARLES J. ‘‘CHUCK’’ FLEISCHMANN, JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland Tennessee TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama E. SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi HANSEN CLARKE, Michigan MO BROOKS, Alabama ANDY HARRIS, Maryland RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana DAN BENISHEK, Michigan VACANCY (II) C O N T E N T S Thursday, March 31, 2011 Page Witness List ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 2: Issues Raised by Petitioners on EPA's Use of IPCC
    EPA’s Response to the Petitions to Reconsider the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act Volume 2: Issues Raised by Petitioners on EPA’s Use of IPCC U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Atmospheric Programs Climate Change Division Washington, D.C. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 2.0 Issues Raised by Petitioners on EPA’s Use of IPCC.................................................................6 2.1 Claims That IPCC Errors Undermine IPCC Findings and Technical Support for Endangerment ........................................................................................................................6 2.1.1 Overview....................................................................................................................6 2.1.2 Accuracy of Statement on Percent of the Netherlands Below Sea Level..................8 2.1.3 Validity of Himalayan Glacier Projection .................................................................9 2.1.4 Characterization of Climate Change and Disaster Losses .......................................12 2.1.5 Validity of Alps, Andes, and African Mountain Snow Impacts..............................20 2.1.6 Validity of Amazon Rainforest Dieback Projection ................................................21 2.1.7 Validity of African Rain-Fed Agriculture Projection ..............................................23 2.1.8 Summary..................................................................................................................33
    [Show full text]
  • Reforestation in a High-CO2 World—Higher Mitigation Potential Than
    Geophysical Research Letters RESEARCH LETTER Reforestation in a high-CO2 world—Higher mitigation 10.1002/2016GL068824 potential than expected, lower adaptation Key Points: potential than hoped for • We isolate effects of land use changes and fossil-fuel emissions in RCPs 1 1 1 1 •ClimateandCO2 feedbacks strongly Sebastian Sonntag , Julia Pongratz , Christian H. Reick , and Hauke Schmidt affect mitigation potential of reforestation 1Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany • Adaptation to mean temperature changes is still needed, but extremes might be reduced Abstract We assess the potential and possible consequences for the global climate of a strong reforestation scenario for this century. We perform model experiments using the Max Planck Institute Supporting Information: Earth System Model (MPI-ESM), forced by fossil-fuel CO2 emissions according to the high-emission scenario • Supporting Information S1 Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5, but using land use transitions according to RCP4.5, which assumes strong reforestation. Thereby, we isolate the land use change effects of the RCPs from those Correspondence to: of other anthropogenic forcings. We find that by 2100 atmospheric CO2 is reduced by 85 ppm in the S. Sonntag, reforestation model experiment compared to the reference RCP8.5 model experiment. This reduction is [email protected] higher than previous estimates and is due to increased forest cover in combination with climate and CO2 feedbacks. We find that reforestation leads to global annual mean temperatures being lower by 0.27 K in Citation: 2100. We find large annual mean warming reductions in sparsely populated areas, whereas reductions in Sonntag, S., J.
    [Show full text]
  • ALBEDO ENHANCEMENT by STRATOSPHERIC SULFUR INJECTIONS: a CONTRIBUTION to RESOLVE a POLICY DILEMMA? an Editorial Essay
    ALBEDO ENHANCEMENT BY STRATOSPHERIC SULFUR INJECTIONS: A CONTRIBUTION TO RESOLVE A POLICY DILEMMA? An Editorial Essay Fossil fuel burning releases about 25 Pg of CO2 per year into the atmosphere, which leads to global warming (Prentice et al., 2001). However, it also emits 55 Tg S as SO2 per year (Stern, 2005), about half of which is converted to sub-micrometer size sulfate particles, the remainder being dry deposited. Recent research has shown that the warming of earth by the increasing concentrations of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is partially countered by some backscattering to space of solar radiation by the sulfate particles, which act as cloud condensation nuclei and thereby influ- ence the micro-physical and optical properties of clouds, affecting regional precip- itation patterns, and increasing cloud albedo (e.g., Rosenfeld, 2000; Ramanathan et al., 2001; Ramaswamy et al., 2001). Anthropogenically enhanced sulfate particle concentrations thus cool the planet, offsetting an uncertain fraction of the anthro- pogenic increase in greenhouse gas warming. However, this fortunate coincidence is “bought” at a substantial price. According to the World Health Organization, the pollution particles affect health and lead to more than 500,000 premature deaths per year worldwide (Nel, 2005). Through acid precipitation and deposition, SO2 and sulfates also cause various kinds of ecological damage. This creates a dilemma for environmental policy makers, because the required emission reductions of SO2, and also anthropogenic organics (except black carbon), as dictated by health and ecological considerations, add to global warming and associated negative conse- quences, such as sea level rise, caused by the greenhouse gases.
    [Show full text]