What could we learn about climate sensitivity from variability in the surface temperature record?

Abstract. We examine what can be learnt about climate sensitivity from variability in the surface air temperature record over the instrumental period, from around 1880 to the present. While many previous studies have used trends in observational time series to constrain equilibrium climate sensitivity, it has also been argued that temporal variability may also be a powerful constraint. We explore this question in the context of a simple widely used energy balance model of the climate system. We consider two recently proposed summary measures of variability and also show how the full information content can be optimally used in this idealised scenario. We find that the constraint provided by variability is inherently skewed, and its power is inversely related to the sensitivity itself, discriminating most strongly between low sensitivity values and weakening substantially for higher values. It is only when the sensitivity is very low that the variability can provide a tight constraint. Our investigations take the form of “perfect model” experiments, in which we make the optimistic assumption that the model is structurally perfect and all uncertainties (including the true parameter values and nature of internal variability noise) are correctly characterised. Therefore the results might be interpreted as a best-case scenario for what we can learn from variability, rather than a realistic estimate of this. In these experiments, we find that for a moderate sensitivity of 2.5 ∘C, a 150-year time series of pure internal variability will typically support an estimate with a 5 %–95% range of around 5 ∘C (e.g. 1.9–6.8 ∘C). Total variability including that due to the forced response, as inferred from the detrended observational record, can provide a stronger constraint with an equivalent 5 %–95 % posterior range of around 4 ∘C (e.g. 1.8–6.0 ∘C) even when uncertainty in aerosol forcing is considered. Using a statistical summary of variability based on autocorrelation and the magnitude of residuals after detrending proves somewhat less powerful as a constraint than the full time series in both situations. Our results support the analysis of variability as a potentially useful tool in helping to constrain equilibrium climate sensitivity but suggest caution in the interpretation of precise results.

[1]  Martin B. Stolpe,et al.  Assumptions for emergent constraints , 2018, Nature.

[2]  H. Fredriksen,et al.  Emergent constraints on climate sensitivity , 2018, Nature.

[3]  Martin B. Stolpe,et al.  Assumptions for emergent constraints , 2018, Nature.

[4]  B. Santer,et al.  Climate constraint reflects forced signal , 2018, Nature.

[5]  P. Cox,et al.  Theoretical foundations of emergent constraints: relationships between climate sensitivity and global temperature variability in conceptual models , 2018, 1810.12765.

[6]  S. Schwartz Unrealized Global Temperature Increase: Implications of Current Uncertainties , 2018 .

[7]  P. Cox,et al.  Emergent constraint on equilibrium climate sensitivity from global temperature variability , 2018, Nature.

[8]  Veronika Eyring,et al.  Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization , 2015 .

[9]  J. Curry,et al.  The implications for climate sensitivity of AR5 forcing and heat uptake estimates , 2015, Climate Dynamics.

[10]  B. Santer,et al.  Statistical significance of climate sensitivity predictors obtained by data mining , 2014 .

[11]  M. Rypdal,et al.  Long-Memory Effects in Linear Response Models of Earth's Temperature and Implications for Future Global Warming , 2013, 1305.5080.

[12]  Reto Knutti,et al.  Energy budget constraints on climate response , 2013 .

[13]  Olivier Geoffroy,et al.  Transient Climate Response in a Two-Layer Energy-Balance Model. Part II: Representation of the Efficacy of Deep-Ocean Heat Uptake and Validation for CMIP5 AOGCMs , 2013 .

[14]  D. Saint‐Martin,et al.  Transient Climate Response in a Two-Layer Energy-Balance Model. Part I: Analytical Solution and Parameter Calibration Using CMIP5 AOGCM Experiments , 2013 .

[15]  P. Guttorp,et al.  Bayesian estimation of climate sensitivity based on a simple climate model fitted to observations of hemispheric temperatures and global ocean heat content , 2012 .

[16]  P. Jones,et al.  Quantifying uncertainties in global and regional temperature change using an ensemble of observational estimates: The HadCRUT4 data set , 2012 .

[17]  Karl E. Taylor,et al.  An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design , 2012 .

[18]  T. Raddatz,et al.  Correlation between climate sensitivity and aerosol forcing and its implication for the “climate trap” , 2011 .

[19]  Isaac M. Held,et al.  Importance of Ocean Heat Uptake Efficacy to Transient Climate Change , 2010 .

[20]  T. Delworth,et al.  Probing the Fast and Slow Components of Global Warming by Returning Abruptly to Preindustrial Forcing , 2010 .

[21]  R. Knutti,et al.  Comment on “Heat capacity, time constant, and sensitivity of Earth's climate system” by S. E. Schwartz , 2008 .

[22]  G. Schmidt,et al.  Comment on ''Heat capacity, time constant, and sensitivity of Earth's climate system'' by S. E. Schwartz , 2008 .

[23]  D. Kirk-Davidoff On the diagnosis of climate sensitivity using observations of fluctuations , 2008 .

[24]  S. Schwartz Heat capacity, time constant, and sensitivity of Earth's climate system , 2007 .

[25]  Tony O’Hagan Bayes factors , 2006 .

[26]  A. Einstein Über die von der molekularkinetischen Theorie der Wärme geforderte Bewegung von in ruhenden Flüssigkeiten suspendierten Teilchen [AdP 17, 549 (1905)] , 2005, Annalen der Physik.

[27]  D. Balding,et al.  Approximate Bayesian computation in population genetics. , 2002, Genetics.

[28]  S. Raper,et al.  An Observationally Based Estimate of the Climate Sensitivity , 2002 .

[29]  P. Imkeller,et al.  Stochastic climate models , 2001 .

[30]  J. Gregory Vertical heat transports in the ocean and their effect on time-dependent climate change , 2000 .

[31]  Adrian E. Raftery,et al.  Bayes factors and model uncertainty , 1995 .

[32]  P. Diggle,et al.  Monte Carlo Methods of Inference for Implicit Statistical Models , 1984 .

[33]  Stephen H. Schneider,et al.  Atmospheric CO2 and climate: Importance of the transient response , 1981 .

[34]  K. Hasselmann Stochastic climate models Part I. Theory , 1976 .