Impact of Climate Model Parametric Uncertainty in an MPC Implementation of the DICE Integrated Assessment Model

Abstract Integrated assessment models (IAMs) are a key tool in studying the interdependence of the global economy and the climate system. For example, the dollar value of carbon dioxide emissions due to anthropogenic climate damages, known as the social cost of carbon dioxide (SC-CO2), can be computed via the widely used DICE (Dynamic Integrated model of Climate and the Economy) IAM by solving an open-loop optimal control problem. The results of such an open-loop decision-making strategy, however, do not fully reflect the impacts of uncertainty in the dynamic response of the global climatic system to radiative forcing. In this paper, we propose an implementation of the DICE IAM based on model predictive control (MPC). This MPC-based approach draws a clear distinction between the climate model used by DICE for mitigation planning purposes, and the “true” global climate herein captured by a low-order emulation of a model drawn from a state-of-the-art climate model ensemble (CMIP5, the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project). The closed-loop control methodology in this paper thereby quantifies the impact of parametric climate model uncertainty (plant-model mismatch) on estimates of the SC-CO2 obtained from DICE.

[1]  M. Greenstone,et al.  Developing a Social Cost of Carbon for US Regulatory Analysis: A Methodology and Interpretation , 2013, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy.

[2]  W. Nordhaus Estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon: Concepts and Results from the DICE-2013R Model and Alternative Approaches , 2014, Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.

[3]  W. Collins,et al.  Evaluation of climate models , 2013 .

[4]  Emanuele Borgonovo,et al.  Uncertainty in Climate Change Modeling: Can Global Sensitivity Analysis Be of Help? , 2014, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[5]  W. Nordhaus An Optimal Transition Path for Controlling Greenhouse Gases , 1992, Science.

[6]  Alain Haurie,et al.  Integrated Assessment Modeling for Global Climate Change: An Infinite Horizon Optimization Viewpoint , 2003 .

[7]  Andrei P. Sokolov,et al.  Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change Estimated PDFs of Climate System Properties Including Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings , 2005 .

[8]  Michael E. Schlesinger,et al.  Objective estimation of the probability density function for climate sensitivity , 2001 .

[9]  Lars Grüne,et al.  Approximation Properties of Receding Horizon Optimal Control , 2016 .

[10]  C. Hope,et al.  The social cost of carbon in U.S. regulatory impact analyses: an introduction and critique , 2012, Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences.

[11]  Eric Blayo,et al.  Reduced‐order 4D‐Var: A preconditioner for the Incremental 4D‐Var data assimilation method , 2006, 0709.2814.

[12]  Lars Grüne,et al.  Using Nonlinear Model Predictive Control for Dynamic Decision Problems in Economics , 2015 .

[13]  Thomas Sterner,et al.  Global warming: Improve economic models of climate change , 2014, Nature.

[14]  Chris Hope,et al.  The $10 trillion value of better information about the transient climate response , 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[15]  Bernhard Sendhoff,et al.  Robust Optimization - A Comprehensive Survey , 2007 .

[16]  Lukas H. Meyer,et al.  Summary for Policymakers , 2022, The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate.

[17]  W. J. Wouter Botzen,et al.  A lower bound to the social cost of CO2 emissions. , 2014 .

[18]  L. Clarke,et al.  International climate policy architectures: Overview of the EMF 22 International Scenarios , 2009 .