Integrating tipping points into climate impact assessments
Integrating tipping points into climate impact assessments
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10584-012-0572-8
复制
发表时间：
2013-04-01
期刊：
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
Ciscar, Juan-Carlos
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lenton, Timothy M.;Ciscar, Juan-Carlos
目前，自然科学家对气候临界点的理解与经济学家在综合评估模型（IAM）中对气候灾难的描述之间存在巨大差距。特别是，有多个潜在的临界点，而且它们并不都是低概率事件;在全球变暖中期（2-4 A摄氏度）的情况下，至少有一个临界点有很大的可能性会在本世纪过去，并且它们都不能被排除在低（< 2 A摄氏度）变暖的情况下。相比之下，在IAM中，气候灾难的主要框架，以及对它们的批评，是它们与高（> 4 A摄氏度）或非常高（> 8 A摄氏度）的全球变暖有关。这种差异可能会从质上改变综合影响评估机制的预测，包括对碳的社会成本的估计。为了解决这种差异并评估跨越不同气候临界点的经济影响，我们强调了一系列科学观点，这些观点应该在简化的IAM中至少以风格化的形式加以考虑。对于九种不同的临界事件，总结了预期的物理气候影响的范围，并就如何将其转化为对特定部门或地区的社会经济影响提出了一些建议。我们还考虑了通过气候临界点可能会影响经济增长。
There is currently a huge gulf between natural scientists' understanding of climate tipping points and economists' representations of climate catastrophes in integrated assessment models (IAMs). In particular, there are multiple potential tipping points and they are not all low-probability events; at least one has a significant probability of being passed this century under mid-range (2-4 A degrees C) global warming, and they cannot all be ruled out at low (< 2 A degrees C) warming. In contrast, the dominant framing of climate catastrophes in IAMs, and in critiques of them, is that they are associated with high (> 4 A degrees C) or very high (> 8 A degrees C) global warming. This discrepancy could qualitatively alter the predictions of IAMs, including estimates of the social cost of carbon. To address this discrepancy and assess the economic impact of crossing different climate tipping points, we highlight a list of scientific points that should be considered, at least in a stylised form, in simplified IAMs. For nine different tipping events, the range of expected physical climate impacts is summarised and some suggestions are made for how they may translate into socio-economic impacts on particular sectors or regions. We also consider how passing climate tipping points could affect economic growth.