Literature DB >> 33015673

An Assessment of Earth's Climate Sensitivity Using Multiple Lines of Evidence.

S C Sherwood1, M J Webb2, J D Annan3, K C Armour4, P M Forster5, J C Hargreaves3, G Hegerl6, S A Klein7, K D Marvel8,9, E J Rohling10,11, M Watanabe12, T Andrews2, P Braconnot13, C S Bretherton4, G L Foster11, Z Hausfather14, A S von der Heydt15, R Knutti16, T Mauritsen17, J R Norris18, C Proistosescu19, M Rugenstein20, G A Schmidt9, K B Tokarska6,16, M D Zelinka7.   

Abstract

We assess evidence relevant to Earth's equilibrium climate sensitivity per doubling of atmospheric CO2, characterized by an effective sensitivity S. This evidence includes feedback process understanding, the historical climate record, and the paleoclimate record. An S value lower than 2 K is difficult to reconcile with any of the three lines of evidence. The amount of cooling during the Last Glacial Maximum provides strong evidence against values of S greater than 4.5 K. Other lines of evidence in combination also show that this is relatively unlikely. We use a Bayesian approach to produce a probability density function (PDF) for S given all the evidence, including tests of robustness to difficult-to-quantify uncertainties and different priors. The 66% range is 2.6-3.9 K for our Baseline calculation and remains within 2.3-4.5 K under the robustness tests; corresponding 5-95% ranges are 2.3-4.7 K, bounded by 2.0-5.7 K (although such high-confidence ranges should be regarded more cautiously). This indicates a stronger constraint on S than reported in past assessments, by lifting the low end of the range. This narrowing occurs because the three lines of evidence agree and are judged to be largely independent and because of greater confidence in understanding feedback processes and in combining evidence. We identify promising avenues for further narrowing the range in S, in particular using comprehensive models and process understanding to address limitations in the traditional forcing-feedback paradigm for interpreting past changes. ©2020. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian methods; Climate; climate sensitivity; global warming

Year:  2020        PMID: 33015673      PMCID: PMC7524012          DOI: 10.1029/2019RG000678

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Geophys        ISSN: 8755-1209            Impact factor:   24.946


  88 in total

Review 1.  Insights into low-latitude cloud feedbacks from high-resolution models.

Authors:  Christopher S Bretherton
Journal:  Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci       Date:  2015-11-13       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Shortwave and longwave radiative contributions to global warming under increasing CO2.

Authors:  Aaron Donohoe; Kyle C Armour; Angeline G Pendergrass; David S Battisti
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-11-10       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Thermodynamic control of anvil cloud amount.

Authors:  Sandrine Bony; Bjorn Stevens; David Coppin; Tobias Becker; Kevin A Reed; Aiko Voigt; Brian Medeiros
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  CMIP5 models' shortwave cloud radiative response and climate sensitivity linked to the climatological Hadley cell extent.

Authors:  Bernard R Lipat; George Tselioudis; Kevin M Grise; Lorenzo M Polvani
Journal:  Geophys Res Lett       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 4.720

5.  Relationship between sea level and climate forcing by CO2 on geological timescales.

Authors:  Gavin L Foster; Eelco J Rohling
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  The inconstancy of the transient climate response parameter under increasing CO2.

Authors:  J M Gregory; T Andrews; P Good
Journal:  Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci       Date:  2015-11-13       Impact factor: 4.226

7.  Causes of ice age intensification across the Mid-Pleistocene Transition.

Authors:  Thomas B Chalk; Mathis P Hain; Gavin L Foster; Eelco J Rohling; Philip F Sexton; Marcus P S Badger; Soraya G Cherry; Adam P Hasenfratz; Gerald H Haug; Samuel L Jaccard; Alfredo Martínez-García; Heiko Pälike; Richard D Pancost; Paul A Wilson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  On the role of ozone feedback in the ENSO amplitude response under global warming.

Authors:  Peer J Nowack; Peter Braesicke; N Luke Abraham; John A Pyle
Journal:  Geophys Res Lett       Date:  2017-04-30       Impact factor: 4.720

9.  Climate sensitivity, sea level and atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Authors:  James Hansen; Makiko Sato; Gary Russell; Pushker Kharecha
Journal:  Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 10.  The early 20th century warming: Anomalies, causes, and consequences.

Authors:  Gabriele C Hegerl; Stefan Brönnimann; Andrew Schurer; Tim Cowan
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change       Date:  2018-04-25       Impact factor: 7.385

View more
  20 in total

1.  Natural variability contributes to model-satellite differences in tropical tropospheric warming.

Authors:  Stephen Po-Chedley; Benjamin D Santer; Stephan Fueglistaler; Mark D Zelinka; Philip J Cameron-Smith; Jeffrey F Painter; Qiang Fu
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-03-30       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Diagnosing Earth: The science behind the IPCC's upcoming climate report.

Authors:  Jeff Tollefson
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-08-05       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Emergence of the Southeast Asian islands as a driver for Neogene cooling.

Authors:  Yuem Park; Pierre Maffre; Yves Goddéris; Francis A Macdonald; Eliel S C Anttila; Nicholas L Swanson-Hysell
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-09-24       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  The importance of internal climate variability in climate impact projections.

Authors:  Kevin Schwarzwald; Nathan Lenssen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-10-10       Impact factor: 12.779

5.  Observational evidence that cloud feedback amplifies global warming.

Authors:  Paulo Ceppi; Peer Nowack
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-07-27       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Equity is more important for the social cost of methane than climate uncertainty.

Authors:  Frank C Errickson; Klaus Keller; William D Collins; Vivek Srikrishnan; David Anthoff
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  An observation-based scaling model for climate sensitivity estimates and global projections to 2100.

Authors:  Raphaël Hébert; Shaun Lovejoy; Bruno Tremblay
Journal:  Clim Dyn       Date:  2020-12-18       Impact factor: 4.375

8.  Cost-effective implementation of the Paris Agreement using flexible greenhouse gas metrics.

Authors:  Katsumasa Tanaka; Olivier Boucher; Philippe Ciais; Daniel J A Johansson; Johannes Morfeldt
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2021-05-28       Impact factor: 14.136

9.  Emergent Constraints on Regional Cloud Feedbacks.

Authors:  Nicholas J Lutsko; Max Popp; Robert H Nazarian; Anna Lea Albright
Journal:  Geophys Res Lett       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 4.720

10.  Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project Phase 2: Synthesizing Earth System Knowledge for Probabilistic Climate Projections.

Authors:  Z Nicholls; M Meinshausen; J Lewis; M Rojas Corradi; K Dorheim; T Gasser; R Gieseke; A P Hope; N J Leach; L A McBride; Y Quilcaille; J Rogelj; R J Salawitch; B H Samset; M Sandstad; A Shiklomanov; R B Skeie; C J Smith; S J Smith; X Su; J Tsutsui; B Vega-Westhoff; D L Woodard
Journal:  Earths Future       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 7.495

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.