Search

The fortedata R package is an open data notebook from the Forest Resilience Threshold Experiment (FoRTE) – a modeling and manipulative field experiment that tests the effects of disturbance severity and disturbance type on carbon cycling dynamics in a temperate forest. Package data consist of measurements of carbon pools and fluxes and ancillary measurements to help analyze and interpret carbon cycling over time. Currently the package includes data and metadata from the first three FoRTE field seasons, serves as a central, updatable resource for the FoRTE project team, and is intended as a resource for external users over the course of the experiment and in perpetuity. Further, it supports all associated FoRTE publications, analyses, and modeling efforts. This increases efficiency, consistency, compatibility, and productivity while minimizing duplicated effort and error propagation that can arise as a function of a large, distributed and collaborative effort. More broadly, fortedata represents an innovative, collaborative way of approaching science that unites and expedites the delivery of complementary datasets to the broader scientific community, increasing transparency and reproducibility of taxpayer-funded science. The fortedata package is available via GitHub: https://github.com/FoRTExperiment/fortedata (last access: 19 February 2021), and detailed documentation on the access, used, and applications of fortedata are available at https://fortexperiment.github.io/fortedata/ (last access: 19 February 2021). The first public release, version 1.0.1 is also archived at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4399601 (Atkins et al., 2020b). All data products are also available outside of the package as .csv files: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13499148.v1 (Atkins et al., 2020c).

Here we present results from the first phase of the Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project (RCMIP). RCMIP is a systematic examination of reduced complexity climate models (RCMs), which are used to complement and extend the insights from more complex Earth System Models (ESMs), in particular those participating in the Sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). In Phase 1 of RCMIP, with 14 participating models namely ACC2, AR5IR (2 and 3 box versions), CICERO-SCM, ESCIMO, FaIR, GIR, GREB, Hector, Held et al. two layer model, MAGICC, MCE, OSCAR and WASP, we highlight the structural differences across various RCMs and show that RCMs are capable of reproducing global-mean surface air temperature (GSAT) changes of ESMs and historical observations. We find that some RCMs are capable of emulating the GSAT response of CMIP6 models to within a root-mean square error of 0.2 °C (of the same order of magnitude as ESM internal variability) over a range of scenarios. Running the same model configurations for both RCP and SSP scenarios, we see that the SSPs exhibit higher effective radiative forcing throughout the second half of the 21st Century. Comparing our results to the difference between CMIP5 and CMIP6 output, we find that the change in scenario explains approximately 46 % of the increase in higher end projected warming between CMIP5 and CMIP6. This suggests that changes in ESMs from CMIP5 to CMIP6 explain the rest of the increase, hence the higher climate sensitivities of available CMIP6 models may not be having as large an impact on GSAT projections as first anticipated. A second phase of RCMIP will complement RCMIP Phase 1 by exploring probabilistic results and emulation in more depth to provide results available for the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report author teams.

Earth System Models (ESMs) are excellent tools for quantifying many aspects of future climate dynamics but are too computationally expensive to produce large collections of scenarios for downstream users of ESM data. In particular, many researchers focused on the impacts of climate change require large collections of ESM runs to rigorously study the impacts to both human and natural systems of low-frequency high-importance events, such as multi-year droughts. Climate model emulators provide an effective mechanism for filling this gap, reproducing many aspects of ESMs rapidly but with lower precision. The fldgen v1.0 R package quickly generates thousands of realizations of gridded temperature fields by randomizing the residuals of pattern scaling temperature output from any single ESM, retaining the spatial and temporal variance and covariance structures of the input data at a low computational cost. The fldgen v2.0 R package described here extends this capability to produce joint realizations of multiple variables, with a focus on temperature and precipitation in an open source software package available for community use (https://github.com/jgcri/fldgen). This substantially improves the fldgen package by removing the requirement that the ESM variables be normally distributed, and will enable researchers to quickly generate covarying temperature and precipitation data that are synthetic but faithful to the characteristics of the original ESM.

Energy-economic models are used to provide science-based decision support in many contexts; evaluating scenarios generated by these models is critical for establishing the credibility of the analyses these tools support. We propose a framework for evaluating energy system scenarios consisting of three parts – a qualitative storyline, quantitative metrics, and evaluation criteria. We apply this framework to the reference scenario for GCAM-USA, a version of the Global Change Analysis Model with state-level detail in the United States, focusing on the evolution of the electric power sector. We develop new visual analytic tools to facilitate evaluation of model outcomes in 51 sub-national regions, and demonstrate how scenario performance can be tracked and compared across four quantifications of the GCAM-USA reference scenario.

Over the last decades, climate science has evolved rapidly across multiple expert domains. Our best tools to capture state‐of‐the‐art knowledge in an internally self‐consistent modeling framework are the increasingly complex fully coupled Earth System Models (ESMs). However, computational limitations and the structural rigidity of ESMs mean that the full range of uncertainties across multiple domains are difficult to capture with ESMs alone. The tools of choice are instead more computationally efficient reduced complexity models (RCMs), which are structurally flexible and can span the response dynamics across a range of domain‐specific models and ESM experiments. Here we present Phase 2 of the Reduced Complexity Model Intercomparison Project (RCMIP Phase 2), the first comprehensive intercomparison of RCMs that are probabilistically calibrated with key benchmark ranges from specialized research communities. Unsurprisingly, but crucially, we find that models which have been constrained to reflect the key benchmarks better reflect the key benchmarks. Under the low‐emissions SSP1‐1.9 scenario, across the RCMs, median peak warming projections range from 1.3 to 1.7°C (relative to 1850–1900, using an observationally based historical warming estimate of 0.8°C between 1850–1900 and 1995–2014). Further developing methodologies to constrain these projection uncertainties seems paramount given the international community's goal to contain warming to below 1.5°C above preindustrial in the long‐term. Our findings suggest that users of RCMs should carefully evaluate their RCM, specifically its skill against key benchmarks and consider the need to include projections benchmarks either from ESM results or other assessments to reduce divergence in future projections., Key Points Probabilistic global‐mean temperature projections often use reduced complexity climate models (RCMs) because of their low computational costWe evaluate how well RCMs’ probabilistic setups can synthesize knowledge from multiple research domains for policy relevant projectionsNo RCM is able to capture all forcing, warming, heat uptake and carbon cycle metrics we evaluate, however some come close across a range