Expert judgments about transient climate response to alternative future trajectories of radiative forcing

Zickfeld K.; Morgan M.G.; Frame D.J.Keith D.W.

首页> 外文期刊>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America >Expert judgments about transient climate response to alternative future trajectories of radiative forcing

【24h】

Expert judgments about transient climate response to alternative future trajectories of radiative forcing

机译：Expert judgments about transient climate response to alternative future trajectories of radiative forcing

获取原文

获取原文并翻译 | 示例

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相关主题

摘要

There is uncertainty about the response of the climate system to future trajectories of radiative forcing. To quantify this uncertainty we conducted face-to-face interviews with 14 leading climate scientists, using formal methods of expert elicitation. We structured the interviews around three scenarios of radiative forcing stabilizing at different levels. All experts ranked "cloud radiative feedbacks" as contributing most to their uncertainty about future global mean temperature change, irrespective of the specified level of radiative forcing. The experts disagreed about the relative contribution of other physical processes to their uncertainty about future temperature change. For a forcing trajectory that stabilized at 7 Wm~(-2) in 2200, 13 of the 14 experts judged the probability that the climate system would undergo, or be irrevocably committed to, a "basic state change" as ≥0.5. The width and median values of the probability distributions elicited from the different experts for future global mean temperature change under the specified forcing trajectories vary considerably. Even for a moderate increase in forcing by the year 2050, the medians of the elicited distributions of temperature change relative to 2000 range from 0.8-1.8 °C, and some of the interquartile ranges do not overlap. Ten of the 14 experts estimated that the probability that equilibrium climate sensitivity exceeds 4.5 °C is >0.17, our interpretation of the upper limit of the "likely" range given by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Finally, most experts anticipated that over the next 20 years research will be able to achieve only modest reductions in their degree of uncertainty.

著录项

来源
《Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America》 |2010年第28期|12451-12456|共6页
作者
Zickfeld K.; Morgan M.G.; Frame D.J.Keith D.W.;
展开▼
作者单位

School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC V8P 5C2, Canada;

Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States;

Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2BQ, United KingdomDepartment of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada;

展开▼
收录信息美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《生物学医学文摘》(MEDLINE);美国《化学文摘》(CA);
原文格式 PDF
正文语种英语
中图分类自然科学总论;
关键词
Climate change; Climate sensitivity; Expert elicitation; Transient climate response; Uncertainty analysis;

Expert judgments about transient climate response to alternative future trajectories of radiative forcing

摘要

著录项

相关主题

期刊订阅