Sherwood S C, Webb M J, Annan J D, Armour K C, Forster P M, Hargreaves J C, Hegerl G, Klein S A, Marvel K D, Rohling E J, Watanabe M, Andrews T, Braconnot P, Bretherton C S, Foster G L, Hausfather Z, von der Heydt A S, Knutti R, Mauritsen T, Norris J R, Proistosescu C, Rugenstein M, Schmidt G A, Tokarska K B, Zelinka M D
Climate Change Research Centre and ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes University of New South Wales Sydney Sydney New South Wales Australia.
Met Office Hadley Centre Exeter UK.
Rev Geophys. 2020 Dec;58(4):e2019RG000678. doi: 10.1029/2019RG000678. Epub 2020 Sep 25.
We assess evidence relevant to Earth's equilibrium climate sensitivity per doubling of atmospheric CO, characterized by an effective sensitivity . This evidence includes feedback process understanding, the historical climate record, and the paleoclimate record. An value lower than 2 K is difficult to reconcile with any of the three lines of evidence. The amount of cooling during the Last Glacial Maximum provides strong evidence against values of greater than 4.5 K. Other lines of evidence in combination also show that this is relatively unlikely. We use a Bayesian approach to produce a probability density function (PDF) for given all the evidence, including tests of robustness to difficult-to-quantify uncertainties and different priors. The 66% range is 2.6-3.9 K for our Baseline calculation and remains within 2.3-4.5 K under the robustness tests; corresponding 5-95% ranges are 2.3-4.7 K, bounded by 2.0-5.7 K (although such high-confidence ranges should be regarded more cautiously). This indicates a stronger constraint on than reported in past assessments, by lifting the low end of the range. This narrowing occurs because the three lines of evidence agree and are judged to be largely independent and because of greater confidence in understanding feedback processes and in combining evidence. We identify promising avenues for further narrowing the range in , in particular using comprehensive models and process understanding to address limitations in the traditional forcing-feedback paradigm for interpreting past changes.
我们评估了与大气CO₂浓度每增加一倍时地球平衡气候敏感度相关的证据,其特征为有效敏感度。该证据包括对反馈过程的理解、历史气候记录和古气候记录。低于2K的有效敏感度值很难与这三条证据中的任何一条相协调。末次盛冰期的降温幅度提供了有力证据,反对有效敏感度值大于4.5K。其他证据综合起来也表明这种情况相对不太可能。我们采用贝叶斯方法,根据所有证据生成有效敏感度的概率密度函数(PDF),包括对难以量化的不确定性和不同先验条件的稳健性测试。我们的基线计算得出的66%范围是2.6 - 3.9K,在稳健性测试下仍在2.3 - 4.5K范围内;相应的5 - 95%范围是2.3 - 4.7K,上下限为2.0 - 5.7K(不过如此高置信度的范围应更谨慎看待)。这表明通过提高范围的下限,对有效敏感度的约束比过去评估中报告的更强。这种范围缩小是因为这三条证据相互吻合且被判定在很大程度上相互独立,还因为对反馈过程的理解以及证据综合方面有了更高的信心。我们确定了进一步缩小有效敏感度范围的有前景的途径,特别是利用综合模型和对过程的理解来解决传统强迫 - 反馈范式在解释过去变化方面的局限性。