Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Climate Impact Research in the BSR: State of the Art
Dr. Jürgen KroppPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Structure 1. Climate research and modelling: what do we know?
2. What have we learned?
3. Regional climate effects & consequences: can we estimate them?
4. What are preconditions for good policies?
5. The necessary connection of mitigation and adaptation
6. Conclusion – transition to talk II
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Scope of decision makers: Extremes and their Frequency
1
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Climate in the Past and the Future
*We are here!
Eem
Holocene
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Mechanisms are clear more than 100 yearsMechanisms are clear more than 100 years(some physics….)(some physics….)
We need:S = solar constant (1340 W/m2)π R2 = eliminated area of solar insolation (R radius of earth)4πR2 = total earth surfaceα = earth AlbedoεσT4 = Stefan-Boltzmann-Law (SB constant: σ = 5.669*10-8 W/m2 K4)
Example: Zero-dimensional climate model
e.g. Clausius-Clapeyron Law (1834)Stefan-Boltzmann Law: (1879)
ε: counts for thermal absorptionof atmospheric gases
242 )1(4 RSTR )- S(1= T 4 4
T = - 18.6 T = - 18.6 °°C (C (=1)=1)TTTT=14,9 °C (=14,9 °C (=0.6)=0.6)
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
1. There is no direct cause effect relation for single events and climate change, but:
2. Since ~1970 and accelerated in the 90ths significant changes are observed for several extreme weather indicators:
• More days with intense precipitation• Increasing numbers of floods in many regions• Increasing wind peak velocities in various regions• Increasing starting conditions for thunderstorms in some regions• Increasing damage potential for tropical storms (!) and winter storms
Natural Disasters
Extreme weather related loss: ~10% of GNP in industrial nations
Increase of big large natural disasters (Source MunichRe):
Decade 1950-69 1960-69 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99
number 20 27 47 63 91
Mrd.US$ (2004) 45 81 148 228 704
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Basic Foundations of Climate Modelling
ClimateClimate = Statistics of Weather = Statistics of Weather(30yr averages)(30yr averages)
Structure:Structure:Multilayer Grid-Sized Coupled Multilayer Grid-Sized Coupled Ocean Atmosphere GeneralOcean Atmosphere GeneralCirculation Models (~ 300 kmCirculation Models (~ 300 km22))(Origin early 80ties)(Origin early 80ties)
PreconditionsPreconditionsForcing Scenarios: IPCC Storylines (A1, A2, B1, B2)
Consistency & Validation:Consistency & Validation: CMIP: Coupled Model Intercomparison ProjectCMIP: Coupled Model Intercomparison ProjectValidation by observation/reconstruction Validation by observation/reconstruction http://www-pcmdi.llnl.gov/projects/cmip/index.phphttp://www-pcmdi.llnl.gov/projects/cmip/index.php
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
>| |< ~10-50 kmRegionalisation
precipitation
Global Climate Regional Climate
T~300 km
Global Scenario GCM
global
?local
precipitation2050
Infra-structure
soils/Geology
Land use
hydrology
climate
Regional
Simulator
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Tem
pera
ture
Incr
ease
[°
C]
IPCC-Report 2001http://www.ipcc.ch
YEAR
Uncertainties in Global Climate Change
a) Emission Storylines b) Model Uncertainties
climate scenario
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Local Models: why it is so difficult?Local Models: why it is so difficult?Downscaling:Downscaling: from global model scale (~ 300 km from global model scale (~ 300 km22) to a ) to a regional scale (~10-50 kmregional scale (~10-50 km22))
Two strategies:Two strategies: statistical models/dynamical models statistical models/dynamical models
• Physical representation of processes must be more explicitPhysical representation of processes must be more explicit• Need more computational power and timeNeed more computational power and time• Orography must be represented adequatelyOrography must be represented adequately• Boundary constraints (which model?)Boundary constraints (which model?)• Statistical transfer functions do not change in timeStatistical transfer functions do not change in time• “ “Migration” of boundary inputs, etc.Migration” of boundary inputs, etc.
LCM Errors: LCM Errors: Statistical (local) models: 10-20%Statistical (local) models: 10-20%Dynamical (local) models 30-40%Dynamical (local) models 30-40%
Model intercomparisons are ongoing research (e.g. at PIK)!Model intercomparisons are ongoing research (e.g. at PIK)!
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
First Project: PRUDENCEFirst Project: PRUDENCE(Special Issue: Climatic Change 2006)(Special Issue: Climatic Change 2006)
Only a few sources of uncertainties were analysed:Only a few sources of uncertainties were analysed:Radiative uncertaintyRadiative uncertainty:: A2 which is only one IPCC hypothesis A2 which is only one IPCC hypothesisModel uncertaintyModel uncertainty:: subgrid, discretization effects subgrid, discretization effectsSampling uncertaintySampling uncertainty: averages 30yrs: averages 30yrsBoundary conditionsBoundary conditions: running under constraints of one GCM: running under constraints of one GCM
Main results: A2, Main results: A2, means 1961/1990 – 2071/2100means 1961/1990 – 2071/2100
Northwards migration of ecosystemsNorthwards migration of ecosystemsIncrease of precipitation in the north, decrease in the south, more torrentialIncrease of precipitation in the north, decrease in the south, more torrentialrainrainIncrease of extreme wind speeds between 45° - 55°N, more north-westerlyIncrease of extreme wind speeds between 45° - 55°N, more north-westerlyFaster increase of more hot, days than the increase of moderate daysFaster increase of more hot, days than the increase of moderate daysIncrease of heatwaves over central EuropeIncrease of heatwaves over central Europe
Large differences between certain models!Large differences between certain models!
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Gaussian distributions of mean Gaussian distributions of mean summer maximum temperatures as summer maximum temperatures as Basle (Switzerland), (measured: 1961-Basle (Switzerland), (measured: 1961-1990, A); A': HIRHAM4 model), 2071-1990, A); A': HIRHAM4 model), 2071-2100 A2 scenario simulation (B) and 2100 A2 scenario simulation (B) and 2003 summer heatwave (C).2003 summer heatwave (C).
economic
ecological
global regionalA1 A2B1 B2
DJF and JJA precipitation changes,DJF and JJA precipitation changes,simulated by Rossby Centre LCMsimulated by Rossby Centre LCMunder Hadley Centre (left) and under Hadley Centre (left) and MPI HH (right) constraints MPI HH (right) constraints (A2 storyline) (A2 storyline)
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
PRUDENCE ComparisonPRUDENCE Comparison1961/90 – 2075/2100, A2 Hadley Boundary1961/90 – 2075/2100, A2 Hadley Boundary
T (°C)T (°C) P (%)P (%)
BSR CountriesBSR Countries TTaa T (DJF)T (DJF) T(JJA)T(JJA) PPaa P(DJF)P(DJF) P(JJA)P(JJA)
DenmarkDenmark 1.11.1 1.01.0 1.11.1 2.42.4 9.89.8 -6.4-6.4
EstoniaEstonia 1.41.4 1.61.6 1.21.2 4.24.2 10.210.2 4.54.5
FinlandFinland 1.41.4 1.71.7 1.01.0 5.85.8 10.910.9 4.64.6
Germany NorthGermany North 1.21.2 1.11.1 1.31.3 0.10.1 6.06.0 -7.3-7.3
LatviaLatvia 1.41.4 1.61.6 1.21.2 3.23.2 9.79.7 1.81.8
LithuaniaLithuania 1.41.4 1.51.5 1.21.2 2.02.0 8.88.8 -1.1-1.1
Sweden NorthSweden North 1.31.3 1.51.5 1.01.0 5.35.3 9.09.0 2.72.7
Sweden SouthSweden South 1.21.2 1.31.3 1.11.1 3.53.5 11.411.4 -2.1-2.1
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Recent Statements on Regional Climate Recent Statements on Regional Climate ModellingModelling
Model outputs commonly have to be manipulated and combined with observed Model outputs commonly have to be manipulated and combined with observed climate data to be usable, for example, as inputs to impact models (IPCC 2001, climate data to be usable, for example, as inputs to impact models (IPCC 2001, WGI, p. 743, Ch. 13)WGI, p. 743, Ch. 13)
We are not yet at promised level where regional climate models can really We are not yet at promised level where regional climate models can really influence regional policy making (Amanatidis, 2004, scientific officer EC)influence regional policy making (Amanatidis, 2004, scientific officer EC)
We cannot calculate robust regional climate scenarios (R. Betts, Hadley We cannot calculate robust regional climate scenarios (R. Betts, Hadley Centre, 2006)Centre, 2006)
Regional temperature prognosis for Europe has the largest uncertainty of all Regional temperature prognosis for Europe has the largest uncertainty of all continents (P. Stott, 2006)continents (P. Stott, 2006)
We just understand what we are doing, but our knowledge will remain uncertain We just understand what we are doing, but our knowledge will remain uncertain (certain climate modellers 2006)(certain climate modellers 2006)
Is the demand for more and more „accurate and highly spatial“
Is the demand for more and more „accurate and highly spatial“
resolved models an ill-posed question for the design of good
resolved models an ill-posed question for the design of good
policies! policies!
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Yes!Yes!It is not a question whether, where and how large a change It is not a question whether, where and how large a change may be, it is only relevant that climate change comes true!may be, it is only relevant that climate change comes true!On the local scale this needs an analysis of potential impacts On the local scale this needs an analysis of potential impacts and their associated exposure units and its vulnerability!and their associated exposure units and its vulnerability!
Good policies needs a systematic analysis of decision lines,Good policies needs a systematic analysis of decision lines,Institutional settings, in particular, inhibiting and forcingInstitutional settings, in particular, inhibiting and forcingfactors!factors!
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Even modern societies as, US, Even modern societies as, US, Germany, or France are sensitive Germany, or France are sensitive
against weather extremes, therefore against weather extremes, therefore also to long-term climate change!also to long-term climate change!
This implies that they are mal-This implies that they are mal-adaptedadapted
to current weather situationsto current weather situations
It is very likely that CC will It is very likely that CC will increase this problem (cf. 2cd increase this problem (cf. 2cd
transparency)!transparency)!
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Download at:http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/internat/sciencesassess.htm
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
CLIMATE CHANGEincl. variability
Human Interference
Initial ImpactsEffects
ExpectedAdaptations
Residual orNet Impacts
VU
LN
ER
AB
ILIT
IES
IMP
AC
TS
PolicyPolicyResponsesResponses
dangerous? vulnerable?
MITIGATIONMITIGATIONof Climate Changeof Climate Changevia GHG sourcesvia GHG sources
and sinksand sinksPlannedPlanned
ADAPTATIONADAPTATIONto theto the
Impacts andImpacts andVulnerabilitiesVulnerabilities
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Combating and Coping with Climate ChangeCombating and Coping with Climate Change
(Post-) Kyoto-Process: (Post-) Kyoto-Process: MitigationMitigation,, definition of stabilization definition of stabilization levels; technical solutions, e.g. carbon levels; technical solutions, e.g. carbon capturing and sequestration (will be capturing and sequestration (will be
not discussed here in detail!)not discussed here in detail!)
Improving Preparedness:Improving Preparedness: AdaptationAdaptation,, avoid unmanageable avoid unmanageable situations, develop strategies to situations, develop strategies to
manage the unavoidablemanage the unavoidableASTRA‘s main issue!ASTRA‘s main issue!
Consequences of maladaptations?
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Katrina, Gulf of Mexico Gulf of Mexico
20052005(SS5; SS4 - landfall)(SS5; SS4 - landfall)
1000km1000km
Example of maladaptation!Example of maladaptation!
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
New Orleans Terrain modelNew Orleans Terrain model
Lake Pontchartrain
Gulf-Coast
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
They have had the possibility to know it, but- may be – that the awareness was too low….
Drowning New OrleansDrowning New Orleans
by Mark FischettiScientific American (October 1, 2001)
The boxes are stacked eight feet high and line the walls of the large, windowless room. Inside them are new body bags, 10,000 in all. If a big, slow-moving hurricane crossed the Gulf of Mexico on the right track, it would drive a sea surge that would drown New Orleans under twenty feet of water. "As the water recedes", says Walter Maestri, a local emergency management director, "we expect to find a lot of dead bodies".
New Orleans is a disaster waiting to happen. The city lies below sea level, in a bowl bordered by levees that fend off Lake Pontchartrain to the north and the Mississippi River to the south and west. And because of a damning confluence of factors, the city is sinking further, putting it at increasing flood risk after even minor storms. The low-lying Mississippi Delta, which buffers the city from the gulf, is also rapidly disappearing. A year from now another 25 to 30 square miles of delta marsh - an area the size of Manhattan - will have vanished. An acre disappears every 24 minutes. Each loss gives a storm surge a clearer path to wash over the delta and pour into the bowl, trapping one million people inside and another million in surrounding communities. Extensive evacuation would be impossible because the surging water would cut off the few escape routes. Scientists at Louisiana State University (LSU), who have modeled hundreds of possible storm tracks on advanced computers, predict that more than 100,000 people could die. The body bags wouldn't go very far...................
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Methodological Developments for improvedFlood Risk - Prognosis
Return levels for 100yr floods:Return levels for 100yr floods:
−− stationary GEVstationary GEV−− instationary GEVinstationary GEV −− instationary GEV instationary GEV extrapolated trend,extrapolated trend, prognostic interval 5 yrsprognostic interval 5 yrs
Ilz/Kalteneck Change of river run-off
for fitting used Datafor fitting used Dataextrapolated Trendextrapolated Trend
Interval of prognosisInterval of prognosis
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
ConclusionConclusion
Problem of adaptation ist not new, but the view on adaptation changes: humanity now can anticipate disastrous developments!Results from climate models provide valuable hints that adaptation/mitigation is necessary task!They cannot provide information for concrete regional actions, since this lies outside the scope of models!Actions must be developed in close cooperation of decision makers, and scientists....
Closer look and preconditions....
Knowledge improvementAwareness rising
Talk: K. Eisenack & J. Kropp
Implementation ofbest practices
Talk: J.Kropp &M. Stock
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
AMICA - Adaptation and Mitigation - an Integrated Climate Policy Approach:
European Cities Striving for Best Practice Examples
Dr. Jürgen Kropp and Dr. Manfred StockPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
Interregional Thematic Working Groups on Key Themes Related to Climate Impacts:
1. Flooding
2. Coastal erosion
3. Drought
4. Overheating
Approach to combine long-term climate protection and short- and midterm adaptation measures on the local level (transfer of best practice examples)
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
AMICA Project Partners(http://www.klimabuendnis.org)
Provincia di Ferrara
KLIMABÜNDNIS ÖSTERREICH
ALLEANZA PER IL CLIMA ITALIA
Coordinator: European Secretariat Galvanistr. 28, D-60486 Frankfurt am Main
Cooperation with PIK for Scientific Support
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Scope of the Scientific Analysis
Reasons of Concern - Dealing with Risks under Uncertainty
Dimensions of Scale, Time Delay, Multiple Causes, Feedback and Side Effects
Concept of Vulnerability and Adaptation with some Best Practice Examples:
1. River Flood Events
2. Water Management: Droughts and Flash Floods
3. Urban Planning: Heat Waves and Overheating
4. Storms, Thunderstorms and Related Events
5. Sea Level Rise and Coastal Erosion
Adaptation - Main Findings and Evaluation
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Adjustments in ecological, social or economicsystems in response to actual or expectedclimate change stimuli, their effects or impacts
• to reduce vulnerability• to moderate damages• to realize opportunities
Definition: Adaptation to Climate Change
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Climate Impact, Systems Response and Vulnerability
critical limit temperature change
IMP
AC
T
vulnerable
adapted
Climate Change
disastrous impact
significant impact
minor impact
System
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
• crop diversification• purchase insurance• house designs
• early-warning• building codes• infrastructure
• disaster relief• relocation incentives
• crop development• borrow, change activity• reconstruction, relocation
• changes in ecosystem composition, location• wetland migration
Pu
blic
P
riva
teNaturalSystems
HumanSystems
Anticipatory Reactive
Types of Adaptation
Best Practice ExamplesRes
pons
e to
Kat
rina
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
AMICA: Best Practice Examples
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Vulnerabiliy and Adaptation I - Water Management
Global Change
Climate Changegreenhousesgas-
emissions
Regional ExposureSensitivity
Potential Impacts
Socio-economic change
VulnerabilityAwareness & Preparedness
Adaptability
Society
Environment
Interaction
•High water demand•High population density
•Lack of Precipitation •Extreme rainfall events
•Land use management•Risik management
•Loss due to extreme droughts•Loss due to extreme floods
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
First catalogue for adaptation measures (City of Dresden preliminary survey):
1. Retention measurements in urban areas (using for flood and draughts)
2. Protection of retention areas for flood events near rivers
3. Seasonal stabilisation of water-balance (management of groundwater, deceleration in the run-off of precipitation, seasonal water-storage)
4. Adaptations in landscape planning
5. Modification of forest structure and new forest areas
6. Water conservating techniques in the cultivation of soil
7. Adaptations in the waste and drain water systems as an example for necessary measures in infrastructure
8. Adaptations in parks and to road-side trees
9. Adequate treatment of rainfalls in plans for the development of new building areas and new streets
10. Change from flood protection to flood risk management
Thematic working group„flooding/rivers/water-balance in urban areas“
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
www
Christmas flood Cologne 1993
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Financial damage of the 1993 and 1995 floods in Cologne
• Almost the same Almost the same water level water level 1993: 10,63 m 1993: 10,63 m 1995: 10,69 m1995: 10,69 m
• Same sentivitySame sentivity
• But reduction of financial damage But reduction of financial damage by more than 50% !by more than 50% !
• Explained to a great extent by Explained to a great extent by higher preparedness of higher preparedness of affected households and business affected households and business companiescompanies
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Schäden 1993 Schäden 1995
150Mio.DM
65Mio.DM
1993 1995
Mio
. D
M
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
1. Adaptation can reduce adverse impacts
2. Communities will adapt autonomously, but not without costs
3. The key features of climate change are variabilities and extremes
4. Planned adaptation measures usually have immediate benefits
5. Adaptations are likely to be implemented only if they are integrated with existing management and development processes
6. Adaptive capacity varies considerably among countries, regions and socio-economic groups
7. Development activities modify adaptive capacity, yet they tend to omit climate change risks
8. Enhancement of adaptive capacity is necessary to reduce vulnerability, especially for the most vulnerable (people, regions…)
9. Current knowledge of adaptation & adaptive capacity is insufficient
10. Significant enhancements will result from joint projects with decision making authorities and scientific experts
Adaptation - Main Findings
Klaipeda Conference May 18-19th, 2006
Thank you Thank you for your attention!for your attention!
