Climate Change: The Move to Action (AOSS 480 // NRE 480) Richard B. Rood Cell: Space Research Building (North Campus) Winter 2012 February 16, 2012

Class News Ctools site: AOSS_SNRE_480_001_W12AOSS_SNRE_480_001_W and 2010 Class On Line:2008 and 2010 Class – /Climate_Change:_The_Move_to_Actionhttp://climateknowledge.org/classes/index.php /Climate_Change:_The_Move_to_Action

Some Uncertainty References Climate Change Science Program, Synthesis Assessment Report, Uncertainty Best Practices Communicating, 2009Climate Change Science Program, Synthesis Assessment Report, Uncertainty Best Practices Communicating, 2009 Climate Change Science Program, Synthesis Assessment Report, Transportation Gulf Coast, 2008Climate Change Science Program, Synthesis Assessment Report, Transportation Gulf Coast, 2008 Moss and Schneider, Uncertainty Reporting, 2000 Pidgeon and Fischhoff, Communicating Uncertainty, 2011Pidgeon and Fischhoff, Communicating Uncertainty, 2011 Lemos and Rood, Uncertainty Fallacy, 2010

Some Attribution References Rosenzweig et al., Nature, 2008 Barriopedro et al., Russian Heat Wave, Science, 2011Barriopedro et al., Russian Heat Wave, Science, 2011 Dole et al., Russian Heat Wave, GRL, 2011Dole et al., Russian Heat Wave, GRL, 2011 Rahmstorf, Increase of Extreme Events, PNAS, 2011Rahmstorf, Increase of Extreme Events, PNAS, 2011 Shearer and Rood, Earthzine, 2011

The Current Climate (Released Monthly) Climate Monitoring at National Climatic Data Center.Climate MonitoringNational Climatic Data Center – State of the Climate: Global

Readings on Local Servers Assigned –Jasanoff: The Fifth Branch (Chapter 1)Jasanoff: The Fifth Branch (Chapter 1) –Osborn: Spatial Extent of Current WarmingOsborn: Spatial Extent of Current Warming Foundational References –UNFCCC: Text of ConventionUNFCCC: Text of Convention –Kyoto Protocol: TextKyoto Protocol: Text –Kyoto Protocol: Introduction and SummaryKyoto Protocol: Introduction and Summary –Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Web PortalMillennium Ecosystem Assessment

Today: Practices of Climate Community Peer Review Assessment IPCC Response

Briefly revisit scientific method

Scientific Investigation OBSERVATIONSTHEORY EXPERIMENT Knowledge Generation Reduction Disciplinary Problem Solving Unification Integration

Scientific Investigation OBSERVATIONSTHEORY EXPERIMENT Knowledge Generation Reduction Disciplinary Problem Solving Unification Integration Refereed Journals Assessments

Peer Review: Understanding Science BerkeleyUnderstanding Science Berkeley Authors Often: Chooses amongst Editors Recommends Reviewers Provides names of Collaborators Provides names of Competitors Editors: Often volunteer from community Approved by publisher Professional society Commercial publisher Recuses himself / herself if prejudiced Reviewers: Anonymous Recuses himself / herself if prejudiced

Peer Review Standard in Science, Social Science, and Academics –Part of the checking – or validation process –Designed to provide checks and balances to human behavior – supports objectivity –Slow from submission to publication  many months  years –Attacked as closed and prejudiced (East Anglia hack )East Anglia hack –Current efforts to shake it up, open it up, speed it up

Peer Review New efforts at “Open Review” –American Geophysical Union ExperimentAmerican Geophysical Union Experiment –Open Review Chronicle for Higher EdOpen Review Chronicle for Higher Ed Some links to peer review –Cracking Open Scientific Processes, 2011Cracking Open Scientific Processes –European Peer Review, 2011European Peer Review –Future of Peer Review, 1997Future of Peer Review –Peerless Science: Peer Review and the U.S. Science Policy, 1990Peerless Science: Peer Review and the U.S. Science Policy

Peer Review The world, as a whole, does not follow a peer review process –Reports –Analysis –News –Self Interests New models of publication –MediacommonsMediacommons

Scientific Investigation OBSERVATIONSTHEORY EXPERIMENT Knowledge Generation Reduction Disciplinary Problem Solving Unification Integration Refereed Journals Assessments

Assessment Bringing together knowledge to evaluate that knowledge as a body of work relevant to some specific subject or application. –What can we say about climate change? –What are the gaps in knowledge? –How certain are we? –Reconcile conflicting information? How the scientific community communicates with policy makers

Some Assessments USGCRP (US Global Change Research Program) Scientific AssessmentsScientific Assessments –National Climate Assessment (current)National Climate Assessment –First National Climate Assessment (2000)First National Climate Assessment –Synthesis and Assessment ReportsSynthesis and Assessment Reports Climate Change Science Program –National Academy of SciencesNational Academy of Sciences –Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (The assessment process) How is this information evaluated, integrated and transmitted to policymakers? U.S. Climate Change Science Program  U.S. Global Change Research ProgramU.S. Global Change Research Program  AssessmentsAssessments U.S. National Assessment National Academy of Sciences Study Process Published in refereed literature Scientist-authors are nominated by governments to assess the state of the science Draft documents are reviewed by experts who did NOT write the draft. // Open review as wellOpen review as well Draft revised Review by government officials // Final language // All agree IPCCIPCC CLIMATE REPORTS What we know + uncertainty

IPCC Report Process Note

A paper of interest Daniel Farber:Daniel Farber –Review of Climate Modeling Activities and why they should have legal standing.Review of Climate Modeling Activities and why they should have legal standing

Today: Practices of Climate Community Peer Review Assessment IPCC Response

Summary Points: Science Theory / Empirical Evidence CO 2 and Water Vapor Hold Heat Near Surface Correlated Observations CO 2 and Temperature Observed to be strongly related on long time scales (> 100 years) CO 2 and Temperature not Observed to be strongly related on short time scales (< 10 years) Observations CO 2 is Increasing due to Burning Fossil Fuels Theory / Conservation Principle Mass and Energy Budgets  Concept of “Forcing” Prediction Earth Will Warm Validation Evaluation Consequences Land Use / Land Change Other Greenhouse Gases Aerosols Internal Variability Feedbacks Air Quality “Abrupt” Climate Change

We conclude Earth will warm Does it matter? Is it dangerous? Do we respond to this knowledge? How do we respond?

One Response: Policy to Solve it CLIMATE SCIENCE KNOWLEDGE UNCERTAINTY POLICY PROMOTES / CONVERGENCE OPPOSES / DIVERGENCE

Framework for Response Our framework for responding to climate change is summarized at the highest level by mitigation and adaptation.

Science, Mitigation, Adaptation Framework Mitigation is controlling the amount of CO 2 we put in the atmosphere. Adaptation is responding to changes that might occur from added CO 2 It’s not an either / or argument.

Some definitions: (IPCC Glossary)IPCC Glossary Mitigation: The notion of limiting or controlling emissions of greenhouse gases so that the total accumulation is limited. Adaptation: The notion of changes in the way we do things to adapt to changes in climate. Resilience: Amount of change that can be accommodated without severe damage. Adaptive Capacity: Ability to adjust to moderate potential damages. Geo-engineering: The notion that we can manage the balance of total energy of the atmosphere, ocean, ice, and land to yield a stable climate in the presence of changing greenhouse gases.

Thinking about ADAPTATION Adaptation: What people might do to reduce harm of climate change, or make themselves best able to take advantage of climate change. –Autonomous that people do by themselves –Can be encouraged by public policy Command and control tell you to do it Incentives Subsidies –Can be anticipatory or reactive Adaptation is local; it is self help. Adaptation has short time constants - at least compared to mitigation  Hence people see the need to pay for it. Some amount of autonomous-reactive adaptation will take place. –Moving villages in AlaskaMoving villages in Alaska

Thinking about MITIGATION Mitigation: Things we do to reduce greenhouse gases –Reduce emissions –Increase sinks Mitigation is for the global good Mitigation has slow time constants Mitigation is anticipatory policy This is the “second” environmental problem we have faced with a global flavor. –Ozone is the first one. Is this a good model?

Some Mitigation-Adaptation considerations Those who are rich and technologically advanced generally favor adaptation; they feel they can handle it –Plus, technology will continue to make fossil fuel cheap, but with great(er) release of CO 2 Those who are poor and less technologically advanced generally advocate mitigation and sharing of adaptation technology Emission scenarios don’t matter for the next years. There are a lot of arguments, based on economics, that lead towards adaptation –Mitigation always looks expensive, perhaps economically risky, on the time scale of 50 years. Adaptation looks easier because we will know more This will remain true as long as the consequences seem incremental and modest –The Innovators Dilemma, evolution vs revolution?The Innovators Dilemma

Responses to the Climate Change Problem Autonomous/ Individual Policy/ Societal Reactive Anticipatory Adaptation Mitigation

A Management Idea This axis is ability to target cost, quality, time The first and largest improvements come from a plan, an approach to the problem, and identifying mistakes early

Policy: Global and Local GREEN HOUSE GAS INCREASE SURFACE WARMING GLOBAL CONSEQUENCES GLOBAL POLICY (MITIGATION) LOCAL POLICY (ADAPTATION)

IPCC projections: Where is the challenge of mitigation? Takes a long time to separate

Framework for response What is dangerous climate change?

Stern Report: Influential: Useful for thinking about problem Draws on recent science which points to ‘significant risks of temperature increases above 5°C under business-as-usual by the early part of the next century’ — other studies typically have focused on increases of 2–3°C. Treats aversion to risk explicitly. Adopts low pure time discount rates to give future generations equal weight. Takes account of the disproportionate impacts on poor regions.

Dangerous climate change? Stern, 2006

Some carry away messages Determine what is a tolerable ceiling for carbon dioxide. -Gives cap for a cap and trade system. -Tolerable ceilings have been posed as between 450 and 550 ppm. -Ice sheet melting and sea level? -Oceanic circulation / The Gulf Stream? -Ocean acidification? -Determine a tolerable measure of increased temperature -Copenhagen Accord (2009)  2 o C

Dangerous climate change? Stern, 2006

Framework for Response Stabilization: That we can manage our emissions so that the amount of carbon dioxide, more generally, greenhouse gases, so that we control the amount in that atmosphere at a stable level  one small enough to avoid dangerous climate change.