Sec. 5 A brief primer on climate modelling

Last update: Mon Jan 23 22:03:22 2023 -0500 (d07d3c4)

In Lab 1, we learned how to acquire data for the past, and perform a basic baseline analysis. In Lab 2 (Sec. 6), we will be looking the other direction, towards the future. Before we begin, this chapter serves as a primer on basic climate modelling.

Since we scientists do not have a crystal ball to tell the future of our climate system, we rely on models to provide us with one of many “possible futures”. Unlike fortune telling, climate modelling is based on our scientific understanding of the Earth’s climate system. Indeed, the most important point to be made for climate modelling is that, in principle, all climate models are based in the laws of physics: conservation of energy, conservation of mass, and conservation of momentum. As such, climate models provide a mathematical representation of the interactions among the distinct components of the Earth’s climate system.

5.1 Types of climate models

Climate models vary in complexity. The complexity of a model can depend on the number of dimensions represented in the model and/or the number of climate system components (e.g., atmosphere, ocean, land and sea ice) that the model examines.

5.1.1 Lower-dimensional models

Let’s first take a look at some examples of models of varying dimensionality. As we will see, models can have between zero to three dimensions (four it we include the time dimension).

5.1.1.1 0-D models

Among the earliest climate models were the zero-dimensional models, which only model the conservation of energy. A famous 0-D model is the Daisyworld model by Watson and Lovelock (1983) The Daisyworld model considered the manipulation of albedo, and its impact on temperature on the fictional planet of Daisyworld. While, by all considerations, a fairly simple model, Daisyworld represents many of the processes of climate change here on Earth, such as the ice-albedo feedback involved in arctic warming.

If you would like to see the output of a Daisyworld model, you can check out this implementation for Python, or this implementation for R.

5.1.1.2 1-D models

One-dimensional models add a spatial dimension to the 0-D models. Examples of 1-D models include energy-balance models (latitude is the extra dimension), or models of radiative or radiative-convective equilibrium (altitude).

The energy-balance model can be summarized by the following equation: \[ \textrm{Absorbed Solar Radiation} - \textrm{Outgoing Longwave Radiation} = \textrm{Energy Transport}\\ S(x,\alpha(T_s)) - F(x, T_s) = D(x, T_s)\\ \] Where \(x = \sin\phi\), \(\phi\) is the latitude, and \(\alpha\) is albedo. \(D\) represents the divergence of the horizontal energy flux, often approximated by downgradient diffusive horizontal heat transport.

5.1.2 3-D models and model components

Chances are, if you consider a climate model today, you are probably thinking about a 3-D model, specifically about a General Circulation Model or Global Climate Model (GCM). Three-dimensional models are based on important laws of physics, such as the conservation of energy, the conservation of momentum (atmospheric and oceanic flows), and the conservation of mass (atmospheric gasses, water vapour, and salt in the oceans), as well as many other theoretical and empirical physical relationships. These models require, at a minimum, a system of governing mathematical equations that represent our understanding of the Earth’s climate system, methods for solving these equations, good observational data of the boundary conditions (e.g. GHGs, aerosols, insolation, orography, etc.), and (without fail) considerable computing resources.

You may have noticed that we left out 2-D models, above. A two-dimensional climate model starts out as a 3-D model, but removes one of the dimensions (often longitude). By removing a dimension, we reduce the resources needed to compute the model. While 2-D models can be efficient for modelling simple processes, they have become less relevant as the cost of computing resources continues to decline.

3-D models can consist of a single climate system component, such as atmosphere-only GCMs or ocean-only GCMs. However, the term “GCM” most often refers to Coupled Global Climate Models (CGCMs) or Earth System Models (ESMs), which comprise several of these individual component models coupled together. These components exchange heat, water, and other variables, and thus, influence one another, making up the larger overall CGCM or ESM. State-of-the-art ESMs consist of all the main climate system components, atmosphere, ocean, land and sea ice, and also include some representation of biogeochemistry, atmospheric chemistry and/or the carbon cycle.

Throughout the lab exercises, we will make use of model output from the models that participated in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). CMIP6 is an international effort, involving 49 modelling teams and up to 72 individual models. CMIP6 model output were used to inform the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report. You can find more information about CMIP6 here.

5.2 Climate Change Scenarios: The Shared Socio-economic Pathways

A model by itself can’t project the future without a little guidance. This is where climate change scenarios come in. A scenario is the description of some “plausible future”. Usually, scenarios will consider how the future of the world will look in terms of: socio-economics, technology, populations, the environment, and geopolitics. Scenarios are not predictions of the future. Instead, they can help us to understand the unknown such that we can come to robust, informed decisions in the face of a range of possible outcomes.

In this lab manual, we will focus on the Shared Socio-economic Pathways (OŃeill et al. 2014), the generation of climate scenarios which were developed for the IPCC’s sixth assessment report (Masson-Delmotte et al. 2021). These scenarios, abbreviated as SSPs, are a set of consistent climate projections, however, they are not integrated scenarios. They provide the first step for further analysis.

Each of the five SSP scenarios was developed based on scenarios in the climate literature, with the goal that the five scenarios would, together, provide a full range of the scenarios that were present in the literature at the time of their development. SSP5-8.5 was based on earlier scenarios, including the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP8.5) from the IPCC’s fifth assessment report and the A2 “business as usual” scenario from the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) and the IPCC’s fourth assessment report. It is characterized by high energy usage, rapid population growth, low technological development, and poor global political cooperation. SSPs 1-1.9, 1-2.6, 2-4.5, and 3-7.0, on the other hand, are based on energy use of between 400 and 1200 EJ (\(1\) EJ = \(1 \times 10^{18}\)J) by 2100. These scenarios place a higher focus on alternative and renewable energy. A key difference between these scenarios is the projected population growth and GDP.

Based on the above assumptions about energy use, population growth, technological development, etc., estimates of greenhouse gas (GHG) and aerosol emissions and concentrations and land use change are generated for each scenario and used as boundary conditions for the GCMs/ESMs. The four scenarios are summarized in the following table.

Name Radiative Forcing Concentration (ppm) Path
SSP5-8.5 >8.5 Wm\(^{-2}\) in 2100 > 1,135 CO\(_2\) in 2100 Increasing
SSP3-7.0 ~7 Wm\(^{-2}\) in 2100 ~870 CO\(_2\) after 2100 Increasing
SSP2-4.5 ~4.5 Wm\(^{-2}\) in 2100 ~600 CO\(_2\) after 2100 Stabilization
SSP1-2.6 Peak at ~3 Wm\(^{-2}\) before 2100 and then declines Peak of ~470 CO\(_2\) before 2100 and then declines Peak and decline
SSP1-1.9 Peak at ~2.4 Wm\(^{-2}\) before 2100 and then declines Peak of ~440 CO\(_2\) before 2100 and then declines Peak and decline

Adapted from Meinshausen et al. (2020).

The SSPs are not policy prescriptive. The socio-economic scenarios used to generate the SSPs are not unique. The SSPs should not be interpreted as forecasts, nor as absolute bounds for the future.

If you would like to see some examples of the SSPs and climate model data, poke around the IPCC Working Group I Interactive Atlas.

In Lab 2 (Sec. 6), you will learn how to obtain GCM/ESM data from the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) and Google Cloud. In Lab 3 (Sec. 8), we will learn to read the data from these files into Python.

References

Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, et al. 2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC.
Meinshausen, M., Z. R. J. Nicholls, J. Lewis, M. J. Gidden, E. Vogel, M. Freund, U. Beyerle, et al. 2020. “The Shared Socio-Economic Pathway (SSP) Greenhouse Gas Concentrations and Their Extensions to 2500.” Geoscientific Model Development 13 (8): 3571–3605. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3571-2020.
OŃeill, B. C., E. Kriegler, K. Riahi, S. Hallegatte, T. R. Carter, R Mathur, and D. P. van Vuuren. 2014. “A New Scenario Framework for Climate Change Research: The Concept of Shared Socioeconomic Pathways.” Climatic Change 122: 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0905-2.
Watson, Andrew J, and James E Lovelock. 1983. “Biological Homeostasis of the Global Environment: The Parable of Daisyworld.” Tellus B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology 35 (4): 284–89.