IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v407y2000i6804d10.1038_35036559.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying the uncertainty in forecasts of anthropogenic climate change

Author

Listed:
  • Myles R. Allen

    (Space Science and Technology Department Rutherford Appleton Laboratory)

  • Peter A. Stott

    (Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, The Meteorological Office)

  • John F. B. Mitchell

    (Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research, The Meteorological Office)

  • Reiner Schnur

    (Max-Planck-Institut für Meteorologie)

  • Thomas L. Delworth

    (Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory/NOAA)

Abstract

Forecasts of climate change are inevitably uncertain. It is therefore essential to quantify the risk of significant departures from the predicted response to a given emission scenario. Previous analyses of this risk have been based either on expert opinion1, perturbation analysis of simplified climate models2,3,4,5 or the comparison of predictions from general circulation models6. Recent observed changes that appear to be attributable to human influence7,8,9,10,11,12 provide a powerful constraint on the uncertainties in multi-decadal forecasts. Here we assess the range of warming rates over the coming 50 years that are consistent with the observed near-surface temperature record as well as with the overall patterns of response predicted by several general circulation models. We expect global mean temperatures in the decade 2036–46 to be 1–2.5 K warmer than in pre-industrial times under a ‘business as usual’ emission scenario. This range is relatively robust to errors in the models' climate sensitivity, rate of oceanic heat uptake or global response to sulphate aerosols as long as these errors are persistent over time. Substantial changes in the current balance of greenhouse warming and sulphate aerosol cooling would, however, increase the uncertainty. Unlike 50-year warming rates, the final equilibrium warming after the atmospheric composition stabilizes remains very uncertain, despite the evidence provided by the emerging signal.

Suggested Citation

  • Myles R. Allen & Peter A. Stott & John F. B. Mitchell & Reiner Schnur & Thomas L. Delworth, 2000. "Quantifying the uncertainty in forecasts of anthropogenic climate change," Nature, Nature, vol. 407(6804), pages 617-620, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:407:y:2000:i:6804:d:10.1038_35036559
    DOI: 10.1038/35036559
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/35036559
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/35036559?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maxwell T Boykoff & Adam Bumpus & Diana Liverman & Samual Randalls, 2009. "Theorizing the Carbon Economy: Introduction to the Special Issue," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(10), pages 2299-2304, October.
    2. McDermott, Shana M. & Finnoff, David C. & Shogren, Jason F. & Kennedy, Chris J., 2021. "When does natural science uncertainty translate into economic uncertainty?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    3. Michael C. Runge & Clark S. Rushing & James E. Lyons & Madeleine A. Rubenstein, 2023. "A Simplified Method for Value of Information Using Constructed Scales," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 220-230, September.
    4. Alexandra M. Schmidt & Marco A. Rodríguez, 2022. "Discussion on “A combined estimate of global temperature”," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), May.
    5. Yeon-Hee Kim & Seung-Ki Min & Nathan P. Gillett & Dirk Notz & Elizaveta Malinina, 2023. "Observationally-constrained projections of an ice-free Arctic even under a low emission scenario," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-8, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:407:y:2000:i:6804:d:10.1038_35036559. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.