当前将地表变暖保持在一定水平以下的策略,e.g.,1.5或2°C,主张将人为累积碳排放总量限制在0.9或1.25EgC(1018克碳),分别。这些可允许的排放预算基于累积排放与各种建模工作中确定的变暖之间的近似线性关系。IPCC在其《政策制定者摘要》(§D1.1和图SPM.10)中以很高的置信度评估了这种近似线性关系。在这里,我们使用最新一代的地球系统模型(ESM)在专门设计的模拟中测试了这种比例性,该模型包括具有更新的陆地生态系统过程的交互式碳循环。和一套CMIP模拟(ZecMIP,ScenarioMIP)。我们发现,对于相同的累积排放量,大气CO2浓度可以相差100ppmv,地表变暖则相差0.31°C(陆地上的0.46°C)(≈1.2EgC,2°C目标的近似碳预算)。每1Eg排放的碳(瞬态气候对累积碳排放的响应;TCRE)的CO2浓度和变暖不仅取决于总排放量,而且在排放的时间上,迄今为止主要被忽视了。TCRE的分解表明,海洋热量吸收正在补偿一些,但不是全部,碳循环反应诱导的途径依赖性。时间依赖性显然是由于海洋中,特别是陆地上的碳封存过程滞后而产生的,viz.,生态演替,土地覆盖,和人口的变化,等。,在大多数ESM中仍然表现不佳。这意味着碳系统的时间演变状态,但是令人惊讶的是,将碳分配给陆地和海洋的方式与排放途径无关。因此,尽管TCRE对于相同总排放量的不同途径不同,当与碳系统的状态相关时,它大致是恒定的,i.e.,储存在表面水槽中的碳量。虽然这项研究并没有从根本上使既定的TCRE概念无效,它确实揭示了与碳系统状态相关的其他不确定性。因此,为了准确预测未来排放的影响,需要努力更好地理解这种状态与观测和改进模型的依赖性。
Current strategies to hold surface warming below a certain level, e. g., 1.5 or 2°C, advocate limiting total anthropogenic cumulative carbon emissions to ∼0.9 or ∼1.25 Eg C (1018 grams carbon), respectively. These allowable emission budgets are based on a near-linear relationship between cumulative emissions and warming identified in various modeling efforts. The IPCC assesses this near-linear relationship with high confidence in its Summary for Policymakers (§D1.1 and Figure SPM.10). Here we test this proportionality in specially designed simulations with a latest-generation Earth system model (ESM) that includes an interactive carbon cycle with updated terrestrial ecosystem processes, and a suite of CMIP simulations (ZecMIP, ScenarioMIP). We find that atmospheric CO2 concentrations can differ by ∼100 ppmv and surface warming by ∼0.31°C (0.46°C over land) for the same cumulated emissions (≈1.2 Eg C, approximate carbon budget for 2°C target). CO2 concentration and warming per 1 Eg of emitted carbon (Transient Climate Response to Cumulative Carbon Emissions; TCRE) depend not just on total emissions, but also on the timing of emissions, which heretofore have been mainly overlooked. A decomposition of TCRE reveals that oceanic heat uptake is compensating for some, but not all, of the pathway dependence induced by the carbon cycle response. The time dependency clearly arises due to lagged carbon sequestration processes in the oceans and specifically on land, viz., ecological succession, land-cover, and demographic changes, etc., which are still poorly represented in most ESMs. This implies a temporally evolving state of the carbon system, but one which surprisingly apportions carbon into land and ocean sinks in a manner that is independent of the emission pathway. Therefore, even though TCRE differs for different pathways with the same total emissions, it is roughly constant when related to the state of the carbon system, i. e., the amount of carbon stored in surface sinks. While this study does not fundamentally invalidate the established TCRE concept, it does uncover additional uncertainties tied to the carbon system state. Thus, efforts to better understand this state dependency with observations and refined models are needed to accurately project the impact of future emissions.