Risk Analysis

Abstract: We present a self-consistent, large ensemble, high-resolution global dataset of long‐term future climate developed by integrating a spatial disaggregation (SD) pattern-scaling technique and a bias-correction (BC) delta method. The delta method adds the anomalies or deltas (future climate trends) onto a historical, detrended climate that is based on the third phase of the Global Soil Wetness Project (GSWP3). The anomalies or deltas are derived by spatially disaggregating zonal climate projections from the MIT Integrated Global System Modeling (IGSM) framework based on regional hydroclimate change patterns from the 18 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) climate models.

Four emission scenarios are considered to represent the existing energy and environmental policies and commitments of potential future pathways, namely, Reference, Paris Forever, Paris 2°C and Paris 1.5°C. For each emission scenario, a distribution of plausible trajectories is provided by a 50-member ensemble to represent the uncertainty in the Earth system (e.g., the climate sensitivity, rate of heat uptake by the ocean, uncertainty in carbon cycle), allowing for constructing a 900-member ensemble of regional climate outcomes. This global dataset contains nine key meteorological variables on a monthly scale from 2021 to 2100 at a spatial resolution of 0.5°x 0.5°, including precipitation, air temperature (mean, minimum and maximum), near-surface wind speed, shortwave and longwave radiation, specific humidity, and relative humidity.

Quantitative assessments clearly indicate the ability of the dataset to represent the expected large-scale climate features across various regions of the globe. This large‐ensemble, high-resolution dataset can be used for assessing impacts of climate change from a risk-based perspective across different applications, including hydropower, water resources, wind power resources to name a few.

The preeminent conference for the advancement of Earth and space sciences, the AGU (American Geophysical Union) Fall Meeting draws more than 25,000 attendees from over 100 countries each year to share research findings and identify innovative solutions to complex problems. Organized around the theme “Science Leads the Future,” this year’s AGU Fall Meeting will take place in Chicago and online on December 12 - 16.

Abstract: Studies exploring energy transitions typically focus on a single or small set of scenarios, often with idealized policy assumptions (e.g. with global carbon pricing and significant negative emissions). However, there are countless possible ways the future could unfold, with different implications for energy transitions. In this work, we develop a probabilistic multi-sector coupled human-natural system model and explore both deep uncertainty about climate policy design and parametric uncertainty about socioeconomic assumptions, and the implications of those uncertainties for energy transitions and sectoral responses. To reflect policy design uncertainty, we utilize a set of increasingly stringent global emissions pathways comprised of increasingly stringent regional GHG constraints, and consider both “Optimistic” and “Pessimistic” design conditions that represent deep uncertainties for climate strategy, including whether or not there is international emissions trading, coverage of land use emissions and availability of carbon dioxide removal technologies. For each of these scenarios, we then run large ensembles of our model, sampling from probability distributions for uncertain socioeconomic parameters (e.g. productivity growth, population, technology costs, fossil resources). Using this approach, we can quantify uncertainty in the future energy mix and sectoral responses (e.g. emissions, output and energy use) and how that uncertainty shifts for different policy design assumptions.

Results suggest many possible energy mixes are consistent with a given global emissions pathway, and the policy design has significant implications for future energy mixes. In particular, whether or not international emissions trading is allowed results in vastly different amounts of BECCS and afforestation pursued globally, which in turn affects how much fossil energy can continue to be used and decarbonization strategies employed in different regions and sectors. This approach demonstrates the importance of considering uncertainty when planning for energy transitions and that planning for a single future is risky.

Abstract: Physical and societal risks across the natural, managed, and built environments are becoming increasingly complex, multi-faceted, and compounding. Such risks stem from socio-economic and environmental stresses that co-evolve and force tipping points and instabilities. Robust decision-making necessitates extensive analyses and model assessments for insights toward solutions.  However, these exercises are consumptive in terms of computational and investigative resources. In practical terms, such exercises cannot be performed extensively – but selectively in terms of priority and scale. Therefore, an efficient analysis platform is needed through which the variety of multi-systems/sector observational and simulated data can be readily incorporated, combined, diagnosed, visualized, and in doing so, identifies “hotspots” of salient compounding threats. In view of this, we have constructed a “triage-based” visualization and data-sharing platform – the Socio-Environmental Systems Risk Triage (SESRT) – that brings together data across socio-environmental systems, economics, demographics, health, biodiversity, and infrastructure. Through the SESRT website, users can display risk indices that result from weighted combinations of risk metrics they can select. Currently, these risk metrics include land-, water-, and energy systems, biodiversity, as well as demographics, environmental equity, and transportation networks. We highlight the utility of the SESRT platform through several demonstrative analyses over the United States from the national to county level. The SESRT is an open-science tool and available to the community-at-large.  We will continue to develop it with an open, accessible, and interactive approach, including academics, researchers, industry, and the general public.

 

Photo credit: Flickr Creative Commons, James Marvin Phelps

Abstract: Simulation models of multi-sector systems are increasingly used to understand societal resilience to climate and economic shocks and change. However, multi-sector systems are also subject to numerous uncertainties that prevent the direct application of simulation models for prediction and planning, particularly when extrapolating past behavior to a nonstationary future. Recent studies have developed a combination of methods to characterize, attribute, and quantify these uncertainties for both single- and multi-sector systems.

Here we review challenges and complications to the idealized goal of fully quantifying all uncertainties in a multi-sector model and their interactions with policy design as they emerge at different stages of analysis: (1) inference and model calibration; (2) projecting future outcomes; and (3) scenario discovery and identification of risk regimes. We also identify potential methods and research opportunities to help navigate the tradeoffs inherent in uncertainty analyses for complex systems.

During this discussion, we provide a classification of uncertainty types and discuss model coupling frameworks to support interdisciplinary collaboration on multi-sector dynamics (MSD) research. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for best practices to ensure that MSD research can be properly contextualized with respect to the underlying uncertainties.

Key Points:

  • Uncertainty is an inherent part of multi-sector systems analysis;

  • Approaches to addressing uncertainty involve deliberate tradeoffs;

  • Best practices involve standardizing communication and improving transparency

 

Image credit: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Pages

Subscribe to Risk Analysis