National Academies Press: OpenBook

Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis (2013)

Chapter: Appendix C: Method for Developing Figure 3-1

« Previous: Appendix B: Briefings Received by the Committee
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Method for Developing Figure 3-1." National Research Council. 2013. Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14682.
×

Appendix C

Method for Developing Figure 3-1

To develop Figure 3-1 we applied the methods used in Easterling and Wehner (2009) to examine the chances that any 10-year period in the globally averaged annual temperature time series will have a negative or positive trend. Here we extended this method two ways. First, in addition to the global analysis we did the same analysis for each region shown in Figure 3-1. Second, we used projected surface temperatures from the latest state-of-the-art climate models that are being used in the development of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) and available from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) database (Taylor et al., 2012)

We used annual averaged surface temperature projections (e.g., one temperature value per year) from simulations of the 21st century by six different global climate modeling groups from the publicly available CMIP5 database. The models include the Canadian Earth System Model (CANESM2), the National Center for Atmospheric Research Community Climate System Model (CCSM4), the French National Center for Meteorological Research climate model (CNRM-CM5), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) climate model (GFDL-CM3), two GFDL earth system models (GFDL-ESM2G and GFDL-ESM2M), and the Norwegian Earth System Model. The models were run using the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 (Moss et al., 2010) greenhouse gas (GHG) forcing scenario developed for the IPCC AR5 and available from the Earth System Grid portal (http://www.earthsystemgrid.org [accessed November 15, 2012]). Each modeling group provided a set or ensemble of two climate simula-

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Method for Developing Figure 3-1." National Research Council. 2013. Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14682.
×

tions for the 21st century each forced with the RCP8.5 scenario but starting with slightly different initial conditions to represent how the climate might evolve for the 2000–2099 period. The RCP8.5 scenario is close to the SRES A2 scenario used in previous IPCC reports and represents a business as usual GHG increase of about 1 percent per year. Discussions of climate models and their limitations are beyond the scope of this document, but some can be found in Chapter 8 of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report by Working Group I (Randall et al., 2007).

An annually averaged surface temperature from each ensemble member for the 2000–2050 period was used to calculate an annual temperature time series for each region in Figure 3-1 and for the globe by averaging the temperature across all model grid points in each region or for the globe, which resulted in one time series of temperature for each region for each model simulation (see Figure 2 from Easterling and Wehner, 2009, for an example). This resulted in 14 time series for each region (seven models, two simulations for each model). Ordinary least squares (OLS) trends were then calculated for all running 10-year periods (e.g., 2000–2009, 2001–2010, 2002–2011, etc.) for each region’s time series for each model simulation. Each region had 588 trends calculated because there are 42 overlapping 10-year periods for each time series and 14 total time series for each region. All trends for a given region were used to construct each probability distribution function shown in Figure 3-1.

We restricted our analysis to the 2000–2050 model period because the simulated change in global air temperature for this period generally is linear, with acceleration typically starting after 2050. Additionally, the time evolution of simulated global surface air temperature for the 2000–2050 period differs little between the different RCP forcing scenarios, with differences becoming clear only after 2050. This allows us to generalize the results shown in Figure 3-1 to any given 10-year period between 2000 and 2050 across a wide range of GHG emissions trajectories in the coming decades.

REFERENCES

Easterling, D.R., and M.F. Wehner. 2009. Is the climate warming or cooling? Geophysical Research Letters 36:8. doi:10.1029/2009GL037810.

Moss, R.H., J.A. Edmonds, K.A. Hibbard, M.R. Manning, S.K. Rose, D.P. van Vuuren, T.R. Carter, S. Emori, M. Kainuma, T. Kram, G.A. Meehl, J.F.B. Mitchell, N. Nakicenovic, K. Riahi, S.J. Smith, R.J. Stouffer, A.M. Thomson, J.P. Weyant, and T.J. Wilbanks. 2010. The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463:747–756.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Method for Developing Figure 3-1." National Research Council. 2013. Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14682.
×

Randall, D.A., R.A. Wood, S. Bony, R. Colman, T. Fichefet, J. Fyfe, V. Kattsov, A. Pitman, J. Shukla, J. Srinivasan, R.J. Stouffer, A. Sumi, and K.E. Taylor. 2007. Climate models and their evaluation. Pp. 589–662 in Climate change 2007: The physical basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor, and H.L. Miller, Eds. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Taylor, K.E., R.J. Stouffer, and G.A. Meehl. 2012. An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 93:485–498.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Method for Developing Figure 3-1." National Research Council. 2013. Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14682.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Method for Developing Figure 3-1." National Research Council. 2013. Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14682.
×
Page 189
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Method for Developing Figure 3-1." National Research Council. 2013. Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14682.
×
Page 190
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Method for Developing Figure 3-1." National Research Council. 2013. Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14682.
×
Page 191
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C: Method for Developing Figure 3-1." National Research Council. 2013. Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14682.
×
Page 192
Next: Appendix D: Statistical Methods for Assessing Probabilities of Extreme Events »
Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $54.00 Buy Ebook | $43.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Climate change can reasonably be expected to increase the frequency and intensity of a variety of potentially disruptive environmental events--slowly at first, but then more quickly. It is prudent to expect to be surprised by the way in which these events may cascade, or have far-reaching effects. During the coming decade, certain climate-related events will produce consequences that exceed the capacity of the affected societies or global systems to manage; these may have global security implications. Although focused on events outside the United States, Climate and Social Stress: Implications for Security Analysis recommends a range of research and policy actions to create a whole-of-government approach to increasing understanding of complex and contingent connections between climate and security, and to inform choices about adapting to and reducing vulnerability to climate change.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!