WEBVTT
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:18.900
36C3 preroll music
00:00:19.738 --> 00:00:23.635
Herald: ... so I'm looking forward and I
hope you are, too. I am looking forward to
00:00:23.635 --> 00:00:29.920
be told the difference between..
laughs ... we will all be told the
00:00:29.920 --> 00:00:34.730
difference between an input model and a
climate model, and we are going to be told
00:00:34.730 --> 00:00:38.981
this difference by karlabyrinth.
There you go.
00:00:38.981 --> 00:00:48.407
applause
00:00:48.407 --> 00:00:55.079
karlabyrinth: Thank you. Hello and
welcome, everyone. I would like to see my
00:00:55.079 --> 00:01:07.260
slides. Are the slides ...? Ah, OK.
laughs nice. So welcome, everyone, to my
00:01:07.260 --> 00:01:13.700
talk about Climate Modeling - the science
behind climate reports. First of all, I
00:01:13.700 --> 00:01:19.240
will shortly introduce myself and what I
do. I work at the UFZ. That's the
00:01:19.240 --> 00:01:25.200
Helmholtz Center for Environmental
Research in Leipzig and I work for the ESM
00:01:25.200 --> 00:01:32.390
project, which is short for 'advanced earth
system' modelling capacity. I am also a PhD
00:01:32.390 --> 00:01:39.570
student at the University of Potsdam and I
am part of the developer team for the
00:01:39.570 --> 00:01:45.400
middle scale hydrologic model, which is an
impact model. And I'm also a scientist for
00:01:45.400 --> 00:01:54.210
future and an artist. So what this talk is
about? This talk is partitioned into three
00:01:54.210 --> 00:01:59.420
sections, mainly. First is the
introduction where I will introduce some
00:01:59.420 --> 00:02:05.600
nomenclature like what is weather, what is
climate and what we can say about
00:02:05.600 --> 00:02:10.971
predictions. For example, why we can't
tell the weather in three years but we can
00:02:10.971 --> 00:02:16.560
say something about the climate, and what
are climate models. Then the second part
00:02:16.560 --> 00:02:20.760
will be the longest, the science behind
warming graphs. I will show you a graph
00:02:20.760 --> 00:02:26.940
that's typically shown when people tell
you about climate change, and I will
00:02:26.940 --> 00:02:35.930
explain that graph in detail and what is
behind it. The third part would be
00:02:35.930 --> 00:02:39.750
installing an impact model to your local
PC if there is time. If there is no time I
00:02:39.750 --> 00:02:46.871
will skip that. And in the end, there is, as
always, a summary and conclusion. So
00:02:46.871 --> 00:02:54.280
starting with the introduction. Weather is
defined as the physical state of the
00:02:54.280 --> 00:03:01.180
atmosphere at a given time whilst climate
is averaged weather. Most of the time a
00:03:01.180 --> 00:03:07.170
time period of 30 years is taken for that
averaging but also other time periods
00:03:07.170 --> 00:03:14.970
could be taken. So, while, the main
question was, while we
00:03:14.970 --> 00:03:18.389
are not able to predict whether at a
specific date in a
00:03:18.389 --> 00:03:24.190
decade, for example, let's say the 27th of
December in 50 years or so. Why does it
00:03:24.190 --> 00:03:28.920
still make sense to propose general trends
for the climate? That is a question that
00:03:28.920 --> 00:03:39.210
often arises when... and I'll answer that.
So, first of all, it is about average.
00:03:39.210 --> 00:03:45.220
Average cloud coverage gives us
information on average reflection. And
00:03:45.220 --> 00:03:50.870
average reflection is ... has an impact on
the warmth on the earth. And the same is
00:03:50.870 --> 00:03:57.329
true for another scenario. For example,
average precipitation - meaning rain or snow
00:03:57.329 --> 00:04:01.780
and temperature - has an impact on
vegetation and vegetation influences the
00:04:01.780 --> 00:04:06.959
carbon cycle. And that again influences
the warming or cooling and that has an
00:04:06.959 --> 00:04:11.470
influence on the ice coverage. And that,
again, on the reflection. So there are
00:04:11.470 --> 00:04:16.620
lots of processes that are connected to
each other and if we know something about
00:04:16.620 --> 00:04:22.390
the average of some of these physical
state of the atmosphere, we can say
00:04:22.390 --> 00:04:31.050
something about the climate trends. So the
question is, what is a climate model? And
00:04:31.050 --> 00:04:37.820
the AR5 defines a climate model is a
numerical representation of the climate
00:04:37.820 --> 00:04:44.110
system. The AR5 is a source I will cite
quite often. So I have one slide
00:04:44.110 --> 00:04:50.970
with the whole citation. It's the fifth
IPCC report. IPCC is the
00:04:50.970 --> 00:04:57.690
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
and the fifth assessment report is, yeah,
00:04:57.690 --> 00:05:04.720
so AR5 is the abbreviation for fifth
assessment report. But coming back to a
00:05:04.720 --> 00:05:08.949
climate model. So a climate model could,
for example, be a GCM - a general
00:05:08.949 --> 00:05:15.349
circulation model - which is a global
climate model that usually consists of an
00:05:15.349 --> 00:05:24.900
ocean and atmosphere circulation. An RCM
is not a GCM but it's a regional climate
00:05:24.900 --> 00:05:30.030
model, meaning a climate model at a
limited area, and mainly it has a higher
00:05:30.030 --> 00:05:34.610
resolution. And for it is at a limited
area, that usually means that there is
00:05:34.610 --> 00:05:40.830
some input and output going in because
it's not a closed system. And an impact
00:05:40.830 --> 00:05:46.900
model again has usually a higher
resolution in time and space and it's not
00:05:46.900 --> 00:05:50.280
a climate model, but it's for simulating
extreme weather events
00:05:50.280 --> 00:05:56.689
like floods. So if you want to build a
dam or a dike and you want to know how
00:05:56.689 --> 00:06:02.790
high this dike or dam should be, then you
would usually run an impact model that
00:06:02.790 --> 00:06:11.639
gives you information about water height
over decades or longer or so. And then
00:06:11.639 --> 00:06:18.729
you would decide on the height. So this is
the use for impact models. So that's for
00:06:18.729 --> 00:06:24.139
the introduction part. Now I come to the
main part and I will start with a
00:06:24.139 --> 00:06:31.810
question: is it proven? Or with a climate
graph. As that, I will show you a graph, a
00:06:31.810 --> 00:06:36.530
typical image people would show you when
they address climate change. This graph
00:06:36.530 --> 00:06:42.650
has an x-axis with a time scale and you
see it's reaching far into the future. And
00:06:42.650 --> 00:06:49.509
it also has three or four regions
and the first region is only in the past.
00:06:49.509 --> 00:06:57.570
And the y-axis is the global surface
temperature change, meaning how much
00:06:57.570 --> 00:07:05.169
degrees in Celsius or in Kelvin, if it's
different it's the same, we will have in
00:07:05.169 --> 00:07:13.509
future or we had already. And then, you
see several lines and different colors and
00:07:13.509 --> 00:07:21.130
with the names RCP something. And I will
explain all the numbers and everything
00:07:21.130 --> 00:07:27.190
about that graph because it's a pretty
important graph. So first of all, I will
00:07:27.190 --> 00:07:30.599
tell you... no, no. I will tell you
something about the numbers and
00:07:30.599 --> 00:07:38.590
uncertainties. The uncertainties are the
transparent colors behind the lines. I
00:07:38.590 --> 00:07:43.229
will tell you something about the
representative concentration pathways,
00:07:43.229 --> 00:07:51.069
which is short RCP, and so it's reflecting
the colors of the lines. I will tell you
00:07:51.069 --> 00:07:55.340
something about the source of the graphs.
So where does this graph actually come
00:07:55.340 --> 00:08:01.759
from? So I will tell you something about
the assessment report. And first of all, I
00:08:01.759 --> 00:08:07.129
will answer the question: is it proven or
is there scientific evidence that we will
00:08:07.129 --> 00:08:15.599
face that climate change? So, you will see
that graph quite often. First of all, I
00:08:15.599 --> 00:08:22.650
took a definition for proof, for
scientific evidence, from Wikipedia. The
00:08:22.650 --> 00:08:26.830
strength of scientific evidence is
generally based on the results of
00:08:26.830 --> 00:08:31.580
statistical analysis and the strength of
scientific controls.
00:08:31.580 --> 00:08:37.860
Meaning, you make an experiment over and
over again and you change basically some
00:08:37.860 --> 00:08:43.419
influences on the experiments where you
want to know that this does not influence
00:08:43.419 --> 00:08:50.240
the output. So you can narrow it down and
know what is the source of your results
00:08:50.240 --> 00:08:56.440
and so you can prove a physical law or
something. Yeah, I took this comic from
00:08:56.440 --> 00:09:04.010
xkcd because it's a nice... it's somehow
connected. So there is a person who pulls
00:09:04.010 --> 00:09:09.700
a trigger and then gets struck by a bolt
or some something. Something bad happens,
00:09:09.700 --> 00:09:16.550
for example climate change. And then,
yeah, there are two scenarios. For
00:09:16.550 --> 00:09:23.470
example, a person usually would decide,
okay, I would not pull the lever again.
00:09:23.470 --> 00:09:29.630
But scientists usually or more often would
say, okay, maybe: Does that happen every
00:09:29.630 --> 00:09:38.050
time if I do so? Because yeah, that's
basically how you prove something. That's
00:09:38.050 --> 00:09:42.880
experiments. But in case of climate
change, even scientists say you shouldn't.
00:09:42.880 --> 00:09:47.250
Although it's pretty interesting for us
from a scientific perspective. But the
00:09:47.250 --> 00:09:53.750
problem is we only have one earth. We
cannot do this experiment very often,
00:09:53.750 --> 00:09:57.910
except we had a time machine. Then we
could go back, but we haven't so we
00:09:57.910 --> 00:10:05.190
shouldn't do that experiment. And that's
something scientists before, long ago in
00:10:05.190 --> 00:10:10.980
1957 said already: "Human beings are now
carrying out a large-scale geophysical
00:10:10.980 --> 00:10:17.100
experiment of a kind that could not have
happened in the past nor be reproduced in
00:10:17.100 --> 00:10:26.310
the future." So another question is, yeah,
if you ask this question if it is proven
00:10:26.310 --> 00:10:32.320
or that it probably is not happening or so
to climate deniers, they usually would
00:10:32.320 --> 00:10:36.940
tell you: Okay, maybe it's not happening.
And the other side would take the position
00:10:36.940 --> 00:10:40.889
and ask you, okay, if you stand in front
of a road and you want to cross the road
00:10:40.889 --> 00:10:45.740
and there's a car approaching very fast,
would you cross that road? Because it
00:10:45.740 --> 00:10:52.170
could happen that the car stops or makes a
U-turn or something. But well, usually it
00:10:52.170 --> 00:10:59.649
doesn't. And sadly, we know lots about
this experiment, because it's done very
00:10:59.649 --> 00:11:03.600
often before. We know
something about traffic, and that it's
00:11:03.600 --> 00:11:08.980
pretty dangerous. So let's change the
factors a little so that we don't know so
00:11:08.980 --> 00:11:13.990
much about that situation. Let's say a
cube approaches us with a high velocity on
00:11:13.990 --> 00:11:20.910
something that is maybe not a road. Would
you still cross that something? The answer
00:11:20.910 --> 00:11:27.040
is you still probably wouldn't. And why
wouldn't you do so although you know
00:11:27.040 --> 00:11:32.690
nothing about this situation? Well, you do
know something. You know conservation of
00:11:32.690 --> 00:11:37.779
the momentum, which is a physical law you
know about. So you have a situation, you
00:11:37.779 --> 00:11:43.050
know not so much about. You have never had
an experience before, but you still are
00:11:43.050 --> 00:11:48.800
able to make some assumptions because you
know the physical laws behind it. And
00:11:48.800 --> 00:11:58.139
that's basically the same we do with, in
fact, in the context of climate. So we
00:11:58.139 --> 00:12:06.000
have, let's say, just an earth and the sun
and the sun has some radiation and that
00:12:06.000 --> 00:12:10.759
comes to the earth and gets partially
reflected and the earth radiates itself
00:12:10.759 --> 00:12:15.930
because it has some temperature. We know
something about this sun. We know the
00:12:15.930 --> 00:12:24.560
solar insolation. And we know parts of the
light is reflected. And the factor that is
00:12:24.560 --> 00:12:30.060
reflected is usually called albedo. And so
the reflected energy is albedo times the
00:12:30.060 --> 00:12:39.209
solar insulation and albedo is something
about 30 percent. And we know then that
00:12:39.209 --> 00:12:44.980
the light that is absorbed must be all the
remaining energy. So the energy of the
00:12:44.980 --> 00:12:51.990
surface is 1 minus albedo times the solar
insolation. Then knowing Stefan-Boltzmann
00:12:51.990 --> 00:12:58.069
law for energy emissions where the
temperature goes in to the power of four
00:12:58.069 --> 00:13:05.600
and with the Stefan-Boltzmann constant we
can actually find find out the surface
00:13:05.600 --> 00:13:12.970
temperature which then is derived to -19.5
degrees Celsius. Well, we know, probably
00:13:12.970 --> 00:13:18.850
we know, that the earth is much warmer,
and that's because our model in this case,
00:13:18.850 --> 00:13:27.759
which is maybe a climate model, is far too
simple. So we change something about that.
00:13:27.759 --> 00:13:37.009
We add atmosphere, and atmosphere has some
interesting impact. So atmosphere has some
00:13:37.009 --> 00:13:42.750
trace greenhouse gases,
for example CO2 but also H2O, ozone,
00:13:42.750 --> 00:13:52.649
methane, O2 and nitrous oxide. And these
greenhouse gases reflect the radiation of
00:13:52.649 --> 00:14:00.779
earth back to earth, partially. Meaning
the atmosphere has a transparency and this
00:14:00.779 --> 00:14:05.690
transparency we call t is something
between 15 percent and 30 percent. So it's
00:14:05.690 --> 00:14:14.019
not fixed. And that's another interesting
fact. The atmosphere emits energy, which
00:14:14.019 --> 00:14:22.569
we call j atmos, and that goes out in
space and to earth and the energy that
00:14:22.569 --> 00:14:31.269
goes into the atmosphere is 1 minus the
transparency times the energy. So we know
00:14:31.269 --> 00:14:35.550
two equations. The first is the energy
that goes into the atmosphere also goes
00:14:35.550 --> 00:14:43.624
out of the atmosphere. The second is that
the surface energy of the earth
00:14:43.624 --> 00:14:46.759
is the term we had before,
1 minus albedo times the solar
00:14:46.759 --> 00:14:51.879
insolation plus the one part of the energy
that is reflected by the atmosphere. And
00:14:51.879 --> 00:14:56.750
so we have two formulas, two equations
with two unknowns and with the Stefan-
00:14:56.750 --> 00:15:01.540
Boltzmann law from before we can derive
the surface temperature, which is 15
00:15:01.540 --> 00:15:07.500
degrees of Celsius. And that actually is
not so far from what it actually is. In
00:15:07.500 --> 00:15:15.060
2000 it was measured that the surface
temperature is 14.5 degrees. So, I did
00:15:15.060 --> 00:15:23.320
this for a specific t which is 22.5
percent but when we change that t a little
00:15:23.320 --> 00:15:27.949
to, for example, 20 percent, so we add
more CO2 because, for example, we would
00:15:27.949 --> 00:15:35.660
add a factory that would do carbon
emissions. Then the transparency goes down
00:15:35.660 --> 00:15:43.019
and the temperature rises to, for example,
16.6 degrees in case of 20 percent. This
00:15:43.019 --> 00:15:52.960
is also a very old knowledge. So this is
maybe a little much on a slide but it is
00:15:52.960 --> 00:15:58.079
still very interesting because it is
copied directly from a paper that was
00:15:58.079 --> 00:16:05.399
published from Svante Arrhenius in 1896
already. And it's on the influence of
00:16:05.399 --> 00:16:09.879
carbon acid in the air upon the
temperature of the ground. And carbon acid
00:16:09.879 --> 00:16:18.490
is the old term for carbon dioxide. So if
we have a look to the percentage... So he
00:16:18.490 --> 00:16:25.959
investigated: What if we change
carbon dioxide? So what is the impact of
00:16:25.959 --> 00:16:34.740
our behavior? Let's say carbon dioxide
in our atmosphere would
00:16:34.740 --> 00:16:41.759
double, so would increase by a factor of
2, then the average temperature rise in
00:16:41.759 --> 00:16:50.209
Leipzig in December, so I choose the
region for Leipzig, would be 6.1 degrees.
00:16:50.209 --> 00:16:55.550
Well, that's probably a little high, but
what we can't see is already that
00:16:55.550 --> 00:17:02.050
Arrhenius back then already knew that
there is a seasonal impact on
00:17:02.050 --> 00:17:11.800
climate... that climate change is seasonal
and also spatial. So it is not just one...
00:17:11.800 --> 00:17:20.959
not the average temperature is the only
interesting knowledge we get. So
00:17:20.959 --> 00:17:27.810
Arrhenius said something like the
temperature in case of carbon acid doubled
00:17:27.810 --> 00:17:35.810
would be around four to six degrees. And
the current models predict something like
00:17:35.810 --> 00:17:45.610
an increase of two to four degrees for
that scenario. So there is maybe overlap
00:17:45.610 --> 00:17:55.680
already with that simple model from back
then. So, then I come to the question...
00:17:55.680 --> 00:17:59.440
a climate model represents physical laws.
That's what we learned. Where do the
00:17:59.440 --> 00:18:05.460
uncertainties come from? So if we know all
the physics laws and we would just
00:18:05.460 --> 00:18:09.820
calculate everything with this physics
laws, why are there even uncertainties?
00:18:09.820 --> 00:18:13.690
And there are some reasons for that. For
example, the initial conditions is one
00:18:13.690 --> 00:18:18.660
main source of uncertainties, meaning how
is the current state of the climate system
00:18:18.660 --> 00:18:24.330
now? How fast does something move?
Where are the clouds exactly?
00:18:24.330 --> 00:18:27.324
And so on. We don't
know these precise initial
00:18:27.324 --> 00:18:33.522
conditions and therefore errors
occure. Second, would be the
00:18:33.522 --> 00:18:41.750
resolution of a model. So the
temporal and spatial step length, meaning
00:18:41.750 --> 00:18:47.930
we can't... always represent our
climate system with differential equations
00:18:47.930 --> 00:18:55.370
and we approximate everything. We have not
the movement of every molecule but we have
00:18:55.370 --> 00:19:03.250
some average on cells. And if we increase
the resolution then usually the
00:19:03.250 --> 00:19:08.840
uncertainties go down. But sometimes they
even don't for some question, for some
00:19:08.840 --> 00:19:12.260
questions it's better to have a lower
resolution. But mostly it's better to have
00:19:12.260 --> 00:19:15.550
a higher. Then, truncation, so we have
00:19:15.550 --> 00:19:23.050
computational limits. And lack of
understanding, for example, clouds. Clouds
00:19:23.050 --> 00:19:28.180
are not understood pretty well. And when I
read the fifth assessment report, I found
00:19:28.180 --> 00:19:35.600
a sentence a little amusing:
Climate model... Clouds in climate models
00:19:35.600 --> 00:19:47.030
usually tend to rain too early. Yeah, so
but if you know all these sources of
00:19:47.030 --> 00:19:52.250
uncertainty, why is there no such thing as
the one best climate model? Meaning, why
00:19:52.250 --> 00:20:01.130
can't we go to the highest resolution and
to the best... the best computer we get
00:20:01.130 --> 00:20:07.320
and do everything just in the best way and
then we would have our best climate model?
00:20:07.320 --> 00:20:13.220
And there are some reasons for that. For
example, the so-called dynamic core,
00:20:13.220 --> 00:20:19.050
including the method for differential
equations or something like grids.
00:20:19.050 --> 00:20:25.962
For example, if we have a triangular
grid or a rectangular grid. On a
00:20:25.962 --> 00:20:31.960
rectangular grid we usually can
calculate faster but on a triangular grid
00:20:31.960 --> 00:20:37.740
we could, for example, increase the
resolution locally. That might be
00:20:37.740 --> 00:20:44.940
differences. And both have advantages and
disadvantages. Also, the parametrization:
00:20:44.940 --> 00:20:51.680
parameters in our last slide were for
example the t and the albedo which will
00:20:51.680 --> 00:20:55.260
probably be not the final parameters
because they are derived from other
00:20:55.260 --> 00:21:00.550
parameters, but physical laws or something
are often represented by rules with
00:21:00.550 --> 00:21:07.430
parameters, and these parameters can be
estimated. And they can be calibrated with
00:21:07.430 --> 00:21:11.660
different error measures.
And there this is another reason for
00:21:11.660 --> 00:21:16.720
uncertainties and differences in climate
models and then their schemes. For
00:21:16.720 --> 00:21:20.694
example, there are different formulations
of physical processes, for example, that
00:21:20.694 --> 00:21:29.150
again, clouds. And last the truncation,
again, we can also decide how we limit due
00:21:29.150 --> 00:21:37.320
to our lack of computational power. So,
yeah, what do we do? We investigate all
00:21:37.320 --> 00:21:44.220
the models we have. So there are different
climate models that are representing our
00:21:44.220 --> 00:21:48.960
climate and we take all the models that
match certain conditions - I come to that
00:21:48.960 --> 00:21:53.460
later - and we average the output and then
we
00:21:53.460 --> 00:22:05.440
get a climate prediction and also that
uncertainty band you see. So what climate
00:22:05.440 --> 00:22:12.990
models do we investigate? They are so-
called coordinated GCMS. So climate models
00:22:12.990 --> 00:22:18.280
are compared in so-called coupled model
intercomparison projects in different
00:22:18.280 --> 00:22:24.260
phases. These coupled model
intercomparison projects are called CMIP
00:22:24.260 --> 00:22:34.540
4, 5 and 6. So there might have been four
earlier ones. But currently, for the AR6,
00:22:34.540 --> 00:22:45.300
so for the sixth assessment report CMIP6
investigated. And I showed you on the
00:22:45.300 --> 00:22:52.930
map the research centers which took part
in CMIP6, so which take part in the 6th
00:22:52.930 --> 00:23:00.460
assessment report. These research centers
are mainly specialized research centers,
00:23:00.460 --> 00:23:06.770
university and metereological offices, but
generally it's open for any institution to
00:23:06.770 --> 00:23:11.900
participate, as long as they follow a
protocol for their contribution, where
00:23:11.900 --> 00:23:18.480
there are some rules so you cannot just do
anything. These institutions
00:23:18.480 --> 00:23:23.350
need to produce variables for a set of
defined experiments and a historical
00:23:23.350 --> 00:23:31.020
simulation from 1850 to present. This blue
part is a link, so if you go to my slides
00:23:31.020 --> 00:23:37.460
afterwards, you can see these variables
you need to reproduce and then you can do
00:23:37.460 --> 00:23:45.320
something like this. So we have a graph
here again. On the x axis, we see again a
00:23:45.320 --> 00:23:52.370
timescale that reaches from 1850 to today.
And on the y axis we again see the
00:23:52.370 --> 00:24:01.020
temperature anomaly or the temperature
difference between.. so, exactly the
00:24:01.020 --> 00:24:11.440
temperature difference, so how much the
earth has warmed up. We see CMIP3 and CMIP5
00:24:11.440 --> 00:24:21.266
compared, which were the models that were
investigated for the AR5. So we see a
00:24:21.266 --> 00:24:29.420
band. This uncertainty with the yellow and
bluish and the background and then we see
00:24:29.420 --> 00:24:38.210
these two lines, the blue and the red one
from CMIP3 and CMIP5 and then we see the
00:24:38.210 --> 00:24:43.760
black one. And that is what actually was
observed. And we see that this differs
00:24:43.760 --> 00:24:50.410
quite a lot. And that's due to there was
only investigated the natural forces,
00:24:50.410 --> 00:24:54.860
meaning excluded what the human did. And
if we
00:24:54.860 --> 00:25:01.340
also put the human forces into it, then
it's quite matching. And that is the best
00:25:01.340 --> 00:25:09.760
kind of proof we can get. And again, I
said we investigate the physical laws and
00:25:09.760 --> 00:25:19.360
the physical laws were actually results of
scientific experiments. And so, yeah,
00:25:19.360 --> 00:25:30.250
there's this kind of proof. And yeah. So
maybe a little addition. There are also
00:25:30.250 --> 00:25:40.610
other coordinated model intercomparisons
projects that are outside of the IPCC and
00:25:40.610 --> 00:25:45.890
so the ones that are inside the IPCC
where the scientific focus is on a
00:25:45.890 --> 00:25:53.170
subtopic, on something like land surface
for example (and that's what I do). And
00:25:53.170 --> 00:26:01.890
they're also published work
outside from IPCC. So back to the graph.
00:26:01.890 --> 00:26:10.380
We talked about the part: Is it proven?
And I hope I convinced you that it is. And
00:26:10.380 --> 00:26:16.820
now I will talk about the sources of the
graph. So I talked a lot about the IPCC.
00:26:16.820 --> 00:26:26.970
The IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, publishes reports. So for
00:26:26.970 --> 00:26:31.570
example, the 5th assessment report and
what you see here is part of the cover.
00:26:31.570 --> 00:26:41.160
But there have been 4 ones before, as the
name 5th suggests, the first assessment
00:26:41.160 --> 00:26:51.440
report FAR was published in 1990. The
second SAR in 1995. Then there was the TAR
00:26:51.440 --> 00:26:56.380
and then for the 4th assessment report
they changed the name scheme for some
00:26:56.380 --> 00:27:03.590
reason to AR4 and then there was AR5,
which I'm talking about. The IPCC consists
00:27:03.590 --> 00:27:09.410
of several working groups, including
Working Group 1 to 3, providing the
00:27:09.410 --> 00:27:14.530
assessment reports and I mainly focus on
the assessment report from a working group
00:27:14.530 --> 00:27:20.260
1, which investigates the scientific
aspects of the climate system and climate
00:27:20.260 --> 00:27:28.080
change. But there is also a working group
investigating on vulnerability and
00:27:28.080 --> 00:27:33.950
economic impact. And the third one on the
options of limiting greenhouse gas
00:27:33.950 --> 00:27:44.290
emissions and others. So I totally show
you a history of the climate models. In
00:27:44.290 --> 00:27:50.710
something like the 70s, climate models
were investigated where there was just an
00:27:50.710 --> 00:27:56.640
atmosphere, the sun, rain - clouds were
missing - and CO2 emissions. And
00:27:56.640 --> 00:28:02.990
I hope you believe that the sun is behind
the atmosphere and not in this atmosphere.
00:28:02.990 --> 00:28:09.780
In the mid 80s there was prescribed
ice added and already clouds and land
00:28:09.780 --> 00:28:16.550
surfaces and yeah, you see a nice mountain.
But actually in that time the resolution
00:28:16.550 --> 00:28:25.150
was so low that the Alps only had one or
two grid cells, meaning that was not so
00:28:25.150 --> 00:28:33.220
much about land surface, but it was added.
And for the first assessment report there
00:28:33.220 --> 00:28:39.390
was a swamp ocean added, meaning an ocean
was added, but it was had no depth. For
00:28:39.390 --> 00:28:46.140
the second assessment report, the ocean
got some depth. So it was a normal ocean
00:28:46.140 --> 00:28:53.040
with surface circulation and there was
added volcano activity and sulphates. For
00:28:53.040 --> 00:29:01.830
the third assessment report, there was
added... So this is all about which kind of
00:29:01.830 --> 00:29:10.720
processes were there in the climate models
that were investigated in these assessment
00:29:10.720 --> 00:29:16.830
reports. Meaning there were climate models
before that already had those processes
00:29:16.830 --> 00:29:22.210
included, but they were not investigated
in the assessment reports. So this is a
00:29:22.210 --> 00:29:25.710
history of which climate models or which
processes and climate models were
00:29:25.710 --> 00:29:30.650
investigated in assessment reports. And
the third assessment report, there was
00:29:30.650 --> 00:29:35.360
another circulation edit for the ocean,
the overturning circulations. And there
00:29:35.360 --> 00:29:41.580
were rivers added, which is interesting
because I do something with rivers and
00:29:41.580 --> 00:29:46.580
there were aerosols added and a carbon
cycle, meaning that the carbon that goes
00:29:46.580 --> 00:29:54.700
into the atmosphere also goes out. But
yeah, not everything, or that half-time is
00:29:54.700 --> 00:30:02.060
not so good. For the AR5, er 4, there was
chemistry added in the atmosphere and
00:30:02.060 --> 00:30:08.910
interactive vegetation, and for the AR5
there was ozone added and biomass burning
00:30:08.910 --> 00:30:15.930
emissions. And there is a history of
processes, but there is also a history of
00:30:15.930 --> 00:30:21.470
computer modeling that might be really
interesting. It started more or less in
00:30:21.470 --> 00:30:31.090
1904 with Vilhelm Bjerknes, who found
equations that could be solved to obtain
00:30:31.090 --> 00:30:37.650
future states of the atmosphere. And he
thought about that maybe these equations
00:30:37.650 --> 00:30:41.440
are really hard to
solve and that task should be split and
00:30:41.440 --> 00:30:48.170
distributed to many people. So he
basically mentioned a human computer and
00:30:48.170 --> 00:30:54.590
then Lewis Fry Richardson came in 1922 and
did actually calculate all this.
00:30:54.590 --> 00:31:03.580
This did a six hour forecast solving the
equations by hand, alone. And 42 days user
00:31:03.580 --> 00:31:09.060
time, meaning he himself calculated 42
days on it. But those 42 days were
00:31:09.060 --> 00:31:17.790
distributed over two years in total. So he
was a little behind the weather, only to
00:31:17.790 --> 00:31:24.733
find out that it didn't give the correct
answer. audience laughs That was long
00:31:24.733 --> 00:31:32.920
forgotten. But people said, yea, that's
not quite practical. We cannot do that.
00:31:32.920 --> 00:31:38.890
But then computers came. In 1950, the
first successful weather model was run on
00:31:38.890 --> 00:31:45.240
a computer called ENIAC, and in 1950,
weather predictions were run twice a day
00:31:45.240 --> 00:31:53.150
on an IBM 701. Nowadays we use
supercomputers much larger and there's a
00:31:53.150 --> 00:31:59.470
whole list and rank and I will shortly
introduce JEWELS to you: the Jülich Wizard
00:31:59.470 --> 00:32:03.820
for European Leadership Science. That's a
supercomputer in Jülich and I would have
00:32:03.820 --> 00:32:09.960
shown you a picture, but you are not
allowed, you are not simply allowed to
00:32:09.960 --> 00:32:16.640
take pictures on that campus. But since
super computers are fancy shiny cupboards
00:32:16.640 --> 00:32:24.940
anyway, I thought this is OK. So we have
these cupboards that look at shiny covers
00:32:24.940 --> 00:32:31.100
and then this covers their blades and each
blade is called a standard node and
00:32:31.100 --> 00:32:39.760
consists of, in case of JEWELS, 2 times 24
cores with 2.7 GHz and it's hyper-
00:32:39.760 --> 00:32:45.440
threaded, meaning you can actually run 96
threads or processes on one of these
00:32:45.440 --> 00:32:56.360
nodes. And these notes have 12 times 8 GB
of memory. And that's not quite much if
00:32:56.360 --> 00:33:00.780
you want to run a climate model but
I'll come to that a little later. And in
00:33:00.780 --> 00:33:07.470
fact, in case of JEWELS, you have like
three rows of five of these cupboards or
00:33:07.470 --> 00:33:18.040
something. And so there are in total 2271
standard nodes, 240 large memory nodes and
00:33:18.040 --> 00:33:26.030
56 accelerated nodes having something like
GPUs. And I tell you about JEWELS, not
00:33:26.030 --> 00:33:29.900
because it's the
fastest, actually, it's maybe the 30th,
00:33:29.900 --> 00:33:34.340
not even because it's the fastest in
Germany - it was when it was built but
00:33:34.340 --> 00:33:41.440
that's a while ago - but I told you about
that because JEWELS provides actually
00:33:41.440 --> 00:33:46.470
computing budget for the ESM project, the
Advanced Earth System Modelling Capacity.
00:33:46.470 --> 00:33:53.560
And so there are actually earth system
models run on that machine. So what I told
00:33:53.560 --> 00:33:57.040
you before, there is not so much memory on
each node.
00:33:57.040 --> 00:34:00.470
So what you need to do is you need to cut
down your problem and distribute them over
00:34:00.470 --> 00:34:07.130
the nodes. And then there needs to be some
communication. So usually if the task
00:34:07.130 --> 00:34:13.849
is so simple, you can cut down your grid
and put a number of grid cells to each
00:34:13.849 --> 00:34:18.990
node. And then there's communication
between the nodes on the boundaries to
00:34:18.990 --> 00:34:25.589
solve the differential equations. Talking
about grids, I would talk about the
00:34:25.589 --> 00:34:30.159
resolution. Also, again, a history of
resolution of the climate models. For the
00:34:30.159 --> 00:34:36.399
1st assessment report, the region
resolution was 500 kilometers times 500
00:34:36.399 --> 00:34:44.639
kilometers. And as I said before, you see
these two yellow yellowish cells in the
00:34:44.639 --> 00:34:51.970
middle that are the Alps. For the second
assessment report, the resolution already
00:34:51.970 --> 00:34:59.730
doubled or halved, depends on how you want
to phrase it. For the TAR, it was 180
00:34:59.730 --> 00:35:09.410
kilometers for AR4, it
was 120 kilometers. For the AR5, it's a
00:35:09.410 --> 00:35:17.230
little bit a different section I show you.
And also, I show you two resolutions.
00:35:17.230 --> 00:35:23.190
There's a resolution for the higher
models, which is 87, for example, 87.5
00:35:23.190 --> 00:35:30.440
kilometers. And for the very high
resolution, 30 kilometers. And that's
00:35:30.440 --> 00:35:35.359
because climate models are not just one
model, but they are different kinds of
00:35:35.359 --> 00:35:41.049
models that are coupled. And each model
has its own resolution. So it's more or
00:35:41.049 --> 00:35:45.869
less like something like this. So we have
a model for ice, we have a model for
00:35:45.869 --> 00:35:51.859
atmosphere, for ocean and for terrestrial.
And this is coupled. So they all sent
00:35:51.859 --> 00:35:57.130
their data to a coupler or something. And
that set was there as an input to the
00:35:57.130 --> 00:36:02.359
other model. So this is more or
less like how climate models look.
00:36:02.359 --> 00:36:11.599
And each of the models, again, has several
layers. For example, the terrestrial layer
00:36:11.599 --> 00:36:18.010
has a ground water part and the
atmosphere. And so there's some input from
00:36:18.010 --> 00:36:23.910
the atmosphere to the soil and plant
system. And then there's some water that
00:36:23.910 --> 00:36:30.740
is sinking into the groundwater and then
coming out to the rivers. And yeah. So
00:36:30.740 --> 00:36:36.330
then we have the runoff. So meaning rivers
get water. And then if you have a look to
00:36:36.330 --> 00:36:44.210
rivers and want to parallelize rivers,
then it's not so easy because we have a
00:36:44.210 --> 00:36:48.180
source somewhere and the water has to go
from the source or something that happens
00:36:48.180 --> 00:36:55.500
at the source has an impact to the sink,
meaning this has to communicate all the
00:36:55.500 --> 00:37:05.990
way along to the sink. And that's where I
come in. I actually do. So I show you the
00:37:05.990 --> 00:37:11.950
Danube, which you probably know better
with the name Donau. At a resolution of
00:37:11.950 --> 00:37:22.470
five kilometers and basically cut down the
Danube into sub river domains. And we
00:37:22.470 --> 00:37:28.850
need. If we parallelize these we need to
calculate the subriver domains that are
00:37:28.850 --> 00:37:36.470
farther away from the sink first and it
uses that in the first graph a little. So
00:37:36.470 --> 00:37:44.060
the grayish areas are calculated first and
then it goes down farther to the sink. So
00:37:44.060 --> 00:37:52.131
just to tell you about what I do. So now
we come back to the main question. So we
00:37:52.131 --> 00:37:59.269
answered where the sources of the graphs
come from. Now we answer the questions:
00:37:59.269 --> 00:38:06.730
What is a representative concentration
pathway? Meaning what we all did before
00:38:06.730 --> 00:38:13.461
was more or less telling how we get to
that black line in the first section. And
00:38:13.461 --> 00:38:26.150
now we concentrate on the colored part
where we have more graphs than one. So the
00:38:26.150 --> 00:38:31.160
working group 1 of the IPCC generally
tests the selection of coupled models, that
00:38:31.160 --> 00:38:36.200
is what I told you before, matching
specific conditions and investigates the
00:38:36.200 --> 00:38:40.740
output assuming different emission
scenarios. Meaning we have a couple of
00:38:40.740 --> 00:38:46.000
climate models that are somehow different,
for example in their grid. And then we
00:38:46.000 --> 00:38:53.130
have input data. The input scenarios would
be, for example, the first one where we
00:38:53.130 --> 00:38:58.619
just do business as
usual and don't reduce carbon emissions.
00:38:58.619 --> 00:39:05.640
The second would be we start with our way
we do it today, but we would slowly change
00:39:05.640 --> 00:39:10.980
to renewable energy. And the third one
would be a scenario where we do it
00:39:10.980 --> 00:39:15.869
spontaneously now or so. And that is an
input scenario that we put into the
00:39:15.869 --> 00:39:22.730
systems and then we get out a model output,
that says something about the future. So
00:39:22.730 --> 00:39:29.089
there is a black line that says, OK, this
was our history until today. And from that
00:39:29.089 --> 00:39:35.730
on, we have three scenarios and they are
represented upper to lower. So the upper,
00:39:35.730 --> 00:39:47.480
upper and right line represents the way
where we do nothing or so. So this is
00:39:47.480 --> 00:39:55.681
basically what we do with scenarios. And
the RCPs, Representative Concentration
00:39:55.681 --> 00:40:00.599
Pathways are scenarios that include time
series of emissions and concentrations of
00:40:00.599 --> 00:40:06.779
the full suite of greenhouse gases and
aerosols and chemical active gases as well
00:40:06.779 --> 00:40:16.069
as land use and land cover. So that is
another graph from the AR5 and it shows
00:40:16.069 --> 00:40:21.660
again in the X-axis the years, it's the
same timescale as before, but on the Y-
00:40:21.660 --> 00:40:28.599
axis we now have the rate of forcing, that
is basically having this impact on our
00:40:28.599 --> 00:40:36.369
climate. And so each of the RCP scenarios
has some kind of equivalent in
00:40:36.369 --> 00:40:42.690
radiative forcing.
Yeah. So we have a 4 of these scenarios.
00:40:42.690 --> 00:40:52.920
The data for the RCP scenarios is
coordinated by again the input4MIPS: input
00:40:52.920 --> 00:40:57.009
datasets for model and intercomparison
projects that I told you before. And most
00:40:57.009 --> 00:41:01.890
of it is freely available and I gave you
the link. So if you want to run your own
00:41:01.890 --> 00:41:07.609
climate model and test it with these
input, you can find it there. And now I
00:41:07.609 --> 00:41:11.329
will explain the last part. The numbers
and uncertainties.
00:41:11.329 --> 00:41:16.910
So first of all, again, to the graph from
before the numbers behind the RCP refer to
00:41:16.910 --> 00:41:24.000
the radiative forcing at the end of the
modeling period of 2100. Meaning if you
00:41:24.000 --> 00:41:30.819
follow one of these lines, for example,
the red one to where it crosses the 2100
00:41:30.819 --> 00:41:45.910
line, then the number there is 8.5. So
RCP8.5 is the name for this RCP scenario.
00:41:45.910 --> 00:41:52.769
But then the numbers of these different
sections are the numbers of models used
00:41:52.769 --> 00:42:02.790
for this scenario in this time period.
Yes. So as I said, there are lots of
00:42:02.790 --> 00:42:09.869
models intercompared and we even have
different models for the different time
00:42:09.869 --> 00:42:19.321
periods. So until 2100 there are 39 models
for the RCP8.5. And of all the all the
00:42:19.321 --> 00:42:28.890
rest, there are 12. And you see this
little gap, this line break at 2100. And
00:42:28.890 --> 00:42:34.820
that is caused by the change of numbers of
models that took took part in this
00:42:34.820 --> 00:42:40.779
project. And another interesting thing
that we see here, and maybe the most
00:42:40.779 --> 00:42:48.720
important, is we have quite huge model
uncertainties. So if we compare all the
00:42:48.720 --> 00:42:55.390
models, there's a huge band where we can't
exactly say, OK, it's like this or that.
00:42:55.390 --> 00:43:05.980
But this band is still... About human
uncertainties are more important, than this
00:43:05.980 --> 00:43:13.460
model uncertainties. We see tiny overlap,
but mainly we can say how will the human
00:43:13.460 --> 00:43:22.930
behave derives our future. And that there
will be this climate change we are talking
00:43:22.930 --> 00:43:31.150
about. So that was the main part about
this three parts. And it's also it is also
00:43:31.150 --> 00:43:38.470
the most important part. Now, I could
probably show you how you can install an
00:43:38.470 --> 00:43:44.260
impact model to your local PC, but
probably I will have maybe something like
00:43:44.260 --> 00:43:53.339
three minutes left. So we'll switch to the
conclusion. And yeah, maybe if it's
00:43:53.339 --> 00:44:02.089
arising as a question, I can do it. So
what have we learned? Weather is the
00:44:02.089 --> 00:44:06.460
physical state of the atmosphere at a
given time, while climate is average weather
00:44:06.460 --> 00:44:13.650
over 30 years. A climate model as a
numerical representation of the climate
00:44:13.650 --> 00:44:23.910
system. And we learned that the main
uncertainty is the way we solve a
00:44:23.910 --> 00:44:29.549
differential equations. I would probably
have told you what a differential equation
00:44:29.549 --> 00:44:36.560
is in particular, but that would have
taken maybe another lecture. Climate
00:44:36.560 --> 00:44:42.690
change is not proven throughout repeating
one real experiment over and over again.
00:44:42.690 --> 00:44:45.490
So there is only one earth it is said. But
models simulate our
00:44:45.490 --> 00:44:50.640
past climate pretty, well based
on physical laws that were proven in real
00:44:50.640 --> 00:44:58.799
experiments. And then maybe the most
important message. Human behavior
00:44:58.799 --> 00:45:03.690
is the primary source of climate change.
Therefore, we talk about projections and
00:45:03.690 --> 00:45:12.440
not predictions. Meaning if we wanted to
predict the climate, then we needed to
00:45:12.440 --> 00:45:18.390
simulate all human minds. And what we will
decide on future. But we don't. That would
00:45:18.390 --> 00:45:28.030
be another talk again. We take what humans
will decide in future as an input
00:45:28.030 --> 00:45:32.680
scenario, and with these input scenarios
we create different output scenarios. So
00:45:32.680 --> 00:45:37.130
with different inputs scenarios, we get
these different output scenarios. Where we
00:45:37.130 --> 00:45:43.339
can tell, OK, when we behave like that,
this is the output. And human behavior
00:45:43.339 --> 00:45:51.710
scenarios dominate model uncertainties,
meaning the question is what do we want?
00:45:51.710 --> 00:45:55.999
And if you go to a demonstration, the
answer is usually climate justice. And I
00:45:55.999 --> 00:46:10.779
think that's a good answer. Thank you.
00:58:43.809 --> 00:58:44.224
postroll music
00:58:44.224 --> 00:58:44.640
subtitles created by c3subtitles.de
in the year 2020. Join, and help us!