Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Visión General del Reporte Especial de Océanos y Criósfera en un clima cambiante y mensajes relevantes del Quinto Reporte de Evaluación del IPCC (Océanos y Criósfera)
Similar to Visión General del Reporte Especial de Océanos y Criósfera en un clima cambiante y mensajes relevantes del Quinto Reporte de Evaluación del IPCC (Océanos y Criósfera) (20)
More from ipcc-media
More from ipcc-media (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Visión General del Reporte Especial de Océanos y Criósfera en un clima cambiante y mensajes relevantes del Quinto Reporte de Evaluación del IPCC (Océanos y Criósfera)
- 1. IPCC 6th Assessment Cycle: Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) Quito, Ecuador, 12-16 February 2018 Second Lead Author Meeting Hans-O. Pörtner: Co-Chair WGII AR6 AR5: CLA WGII CH. 6, Ocean Systems, Ocean products in TS and SPM, CC-Boxes, SYR, SED
- 2. OCEAN & CRYOSPHERE IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT • The Ocean covers >70% of earth‘s surface plays a key role in climate regulation, weather system and global carbon cycle carries ~50% of global primary and oxygen production supports immense biodiversity provides important social and economic goods and services (tourism, fisheries, transport (90%), etc)
- 3. OCEAN & CRYOSPHERE IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT • The Cryosphere (“Frozen World“) is ~2% of the world‘s water storage, with ~11% of the world‘s land surface and 7% of ocean surface covered with multiyear snow and ice includes mountain glaciers and ground ice, snow covers, as well as Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets, and polar and subpolar sea ice, plays a key role in river runoff, sea level rise, ocean-atmosphere exchange, permafrost methane storage, etc. holds water equivalent to 66 m of sea level rise
- 4. PURPOSE OF SROCC: SPECIAL REPORT ON OCEANS AND CRYOSPHERE IN A CHANGING CLIMATE • Provide a focussed cross-cutting assessment of: The role of oceans and cryosphere in the climate system - observed and projected changes in oceans and cryosphere, ocean cryosphere interactions Risks, vulnerability, impacts and implications of climate- related ocean and cryosphere change for biological and human systems, e.g. sea level rise Resilience pathways and adaptation options • Present new and updated information for decision- makers to inform the design and implementation of appropriate policies and actions.
- 5. SROCC OUTLINE 1. Framing and Context of the Report 2. High Mountain Areas 3. Polar Regions 4. Sea level rise and implications for low lying islands, coasts and communities 5. Changing ocean, marine ecosystems, and dependent communities 6. Extremes, abrupt changes and managing risks + Cross-chapter box: Low lying islands and coasts
- 6. AR5 key and related findings: Cryosphere and Ocean Impacts
- 7. Projected regional climate change (IPCC AR5): South America AR5 WGII Figure 27-2 Ambitious mitigation Business as usual
- 8. Schematic of three types of glacier and their response to climate change (IPCC AR5) WGI FAQ 4.2, Figure 1 Most glaciers are currently larger than they would be if they were in balance with current climate. ELA: Equilibrium line altitude, shifting up from ELA1 to ELA2
- 9. AR5 WGII Figure 27-7
- 10. RCP 2.6 RCP 8.5 WGI SPM.7b, 8c 1.5°C ©H.O. Pörtner Vulnerable ecosystems identified in AR5: Arctic summer sea ice systems ≥2°C ambitious mitigation business as usual
- 11. Sea level rise beyond 2100 may challenge biological and human systems: 1.5°C 1.5°C~ 2°C~ Knutti et al., Ngeo 2015 TO BE ASSESSED IN AR6Global mean temperature change (°C) Long-termsea-levelrise(m) >7m : ...last time when the atmosphere had 400 ppm CO2 (in Pliocene, 3-5 Mya) 5-9 m : ...during the last interglacial (Eemian, 125.000 ya, at 0.7-2°C above pre-industrial) Coming close to Paleo-findings.... ....affecting habitat, freshwater resources, human society through flood events High ambition mitigation needed
- 12. WGII AR5 Figure 6-2
- 13. DISTRIBUTIONCHANGE (KmperDecade) -20 0 20 400 Standard Error Mean Standard Error (359) 100 World-wide marine species displacements due to climate change OBSERVATIONS WGII, SPM.2 …ocean warming as the key driver
- 14. Risk Level with Current Adaptation Risk Level Very Low Med Very High 4°C 2°C Present Long Term (2080-2100) Near Term (2030-2040) Potential for Additional Adaptation to Reduce Risk Risk Level with High Adaptation Reducing risks through adaptation ….risks were assessed in AR5, with open questions for AR6: (key risks are those relevant to article 2, UNFCCC: “avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”)
- 15. Risk Level with Current Adaptation Potential for Additional Adaptation to Reduce Risk Risk Level with High Adaptation Risk-Level Very Low Med Very High 4°C 2°C Present Long Term (2080-2100) Near Term (2030-2040) Impacts of climate change: Key regional risks, Risk reduction by adaptation WGII AR5 and SYR
- 16. @IPCCNews IPCC_Climate_Change http://www.slideshare.net/ipcc-media/presentations https://www.youtube.com/c/ipccgeneva Find us on: Website: http://ipcc.ch/ IPCC Secretariat: ipcc-sec@wmo.int IPCC Press Office: ipcc-media@wmo.int @IPCC_CH https://www.linkedin.com/company/ipcc https://www.flickr.com/photos/ipccphoto/sets/ https://vimeo.com/ipcc THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION! For more information: http://ipcc-wg2.awi.de/ http://www.ipcc.ch/report/srocc/
Editor's Notes
- Figure 27-2 | Projected changes in annual average temperature and precipitation. CMIP5 multi-model mean projections of annual average temperature changes (left panel) and average percent changes in annual mean precipitation (right panel) for 2046–2065 and 2081–2100 under RCP2.6 and 8.5, relative to 1986–2005. Solid colors indicate areas with very strong agreement, where the multi-model mean change is greater than twice the baseline variability (natural internal variability in 20-yr means) and ≥90% of models agree on sign of change. Colors with white dots indicate areas with strong agreement, where ≥66% of models show change greater than the baseline variability and ≥66% of models agree on sign of change. Gray indicates areas with divergent changes, where ≥66% of models show change greater than the baseline variability, but
- FAQ 4.2, Figure 1 | Schematic of three types of glaciers located at different elevations, and their response to an upward shift of the equilibrium line altitude (ELA). (a) For a given climate, the ELA has a specific altitude (ELA1), and all glaciers have a specific size. (b) Due to a temperature increase, the ELA shifts upwards to a new altitude (ELA2), initially resulting in reduced accumulation and larger ablation areas for all glaciers. (c) After glacier size has adjusted to the new ELA, the valley glacier (left) has lost its tongue and the small glacier (right) has disappeared entirely. In all mountain regions where glaciers exist today, glacier volume has decreased considerably over the past 150 years. Over that time, many small glaciers have disappeared. With some local exceptions, glacier shrinkage (area and volume reduction) was globally widespread already and particularly strong during the 1940s and since the 1980s. However, there were also phases of relative stability during the 1890s, 1920s and 1970s, as indicated by longterm measurements of length changes and by modelling of mass balance. Conventional in situ measurements—and increasingly, airborne and satellite measurements—offer robust evidence in most glacierized regions that the rate of reduction in glacier area was higher over the past two decades than previously, and that glaciers continue to shrink. In a few regions, however, individual glaciers are behaving differently and have advanced while most others were in retreat (e.g., on the coasts of New Zealand, Norway and Southern Patagonia (Chile), or in the Karakoram range in Asia). In general, these advances are the result of special topographic and/or climate conditions (e.g., increased precipitation). It can take several decades for a glacier to adjust its extent to an instantaneous change in climate, so most glaciers are currently larger than they would be if they were in balance with current climate. Because the time required for the adjustment increases with glacier size, larger glaciers will continue to shrink over the next few decades, even if temperatures stabilise. Smaller glaciers will also continue to shrink, but they will adjust their extent faster and many will ultimately disappear entirely. Many factors influence the future development of each glacier, and whether it will disappear: for instance, its size, slope, elevation range, distribution of area with elevation, and its surface characteristics (e.g., the amount of debris cover). These factors vary substantially from region to region, and also between neighbouring glaciers. External factors, such as the surrounding topography and the climatic regime, are also important for future glacier evolution. Over shorter time scales (one or two decades), each glacier responds to climate change individually and differently in detail. Over periods longer than about 50 years, the response is more coherent and less dependent on local environmental details, which means that long-term trends in glacier development can be well modelled. Such models are built on an understanding of basic physical principles. For example, an increase in local mean air temperature, with no change in precipitation, will cause an upward shift of the equilibrium line altitude (ELA; see Glossary) by about 150 m for each degree Celsius of atmospheric warming. Such an upward shift and its consequences for glaciers of different size and elevation range are illustrated in FAQ 4.2, Figure 1. Initially, all glaciers have an accumulation area (white) above and an ablation area (light blue) below the ELA (FAQ 4.2, Figure 1a). As the ELA shifts upwards, the accumulation area shrinks and the ablation area expands, thus increasing the area over which ice is lost through melt (FAQ 4.2, Figure 1b). This imbalance results in an overall loss of ice. After several years, the glacier front retreats, and the ablation area shrinks until the glacier has adjusted its extent to the new climate (FAQ 4.2, Figure 1c). Where climate change is sufficiently strong to raise the ELA permanently above the glacier’s highest point (FAQ 4.2, Figure 1b, right) the glacier will eventually disappear entirely (FAQ 4.2, Figure 1c, right). Higher glaciers, which retain their accumulation areas, will shrink but not disappear (FAQ 4.2, Figure 1c, left and middle). A large valley glacier might lose much of its tongue, probably leaving a lake in its place (FAQ 4.2, Figure 1c, left). Besides air temperature, changes in the quantity and seasonality of precipitation influence the shift of the ELA as well. Glacier dynamics (e.g., flow speed) also plays a role, but is not considered in this simplified scheme. Many observations have confirmed that different glacier types do respond differently to recent climate change. For example, the flat, low-lying tongues of large valley glaciers (such as in Alaska, Canada or the Alps) currently show the strongest mass losses, largely independent of aspect, shading or debris cover. This type of glacier is slow in adjusting its extent to new climatic conditions and reacts mainly by thinning without substantial terminus retreat. In contrast, smaller mountain glaciers, with fairly constant slopes, adjust more quickly to the new climate by changing the size of their ablation area more rapidly (FAQ 4.2, Figure 1c, middle). The long-term response of most glacier types can be determined very well with the approach illustrated in FAQ 4.2, Figure 1. However, modelling short-term glacier response, or the longterm response of more complex glacier types (e.g., those that are heavily debris-covered, fed by avalanche snow, have a disconnected accumulation area, are of surging type, or calve into water), is difficult. These cases require detailed knowledge of other glacier characteristics, such as mass balance, ice thickness distribution, and internal hydraulics. For the majority of glaciers worldwide, such data are unavailable, and their response to climate change can thus only be approximated with the simplified scheme shown in FAQ 4.2, Figure 1. The Karakoram–Himalaya mountain range, for instance, has a large variety of glacier types and climatic conditions, and glacier characteristics are still only poorly known. This makes determining their future evolution particularly uncertain. However, gaps in knowledge are expected to decrease substantially in coming years, thanks to increased use of satellite data (e.g., to compile glacier inventories or derive flow velocities) and extension of the groundbased measurement network. In summary, the fate of glaciers will be variable, depending on both their specific characteristics and future climate conditions. More glaciers will disappear; others will lose most of their low-lying portions and others might not change substantially. Where the ELA is already above the highest elevation on a particular glacier, that glacier is destined to disappear entirely unless climate cools. Similarly, all glaciers will disappear in those regions where the ELA rises above their highest elevation in the future.
- Figure 27-7 | Summary of observed changes in climate and other environmental factors in representative regions of Central and South America. The boundaries of the regions in the map are conceptual (neither geographic nor political precision). Information and references to changes provided are presented in different sections of the chapter.
- Figure SPM.7, Panel b Complete caption of Figure SPM.7: Figure SPM.7 | CMIP5 multi-model simulated time series from 1950 to 2100 for Northern Hemisphere September sea ice extent (5-year running mean). Time series of projections and a measure of uncertainty (shading) are shown for scenarios RCP2.6 (blue) and RCP8.5 (red). Black (grey shading) is the modelled historical evolution using historical reconstructed forcings. The mean and associated uncertainties averaged over 2081−2100 are given for all RCP scenarios as colored vertical bars. The numbers of CMIP5 models used to calculate the multi-model mean is indicated. For sea ice extent (b), the projected mean and uncertainty (minimum-maximum range) of the subset of models that most closely reproduce the climatological mean state and 1979 to 2012 trend of the Arctic sea ice is given (number of models given in brackets). For completeness, the CMIP5 multi-model mean is also indicated with dotted lines. The dashed line represents nearly ice-free conditions (i.e., when sea ice extent is less than 106 km2 for at least five consecutive years). For further technical details see the Technical Summary Supplementary Material {Figures 6.28, 12.5, and 12.28–12.31; Figures TS.15, TS.17, and TS.20}
- Projected alteration (magnitude and frequency) of oceanic fluxes and atmospheric events due to a changing climate in the coming decades
- Zero click brings on legend animation, first click brings on Af/Eur/As/Aus, second click brings on the others, third click brings on all Key risks are potentially severe impacts relevant to Article 2 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which refers to “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” Risks are considered key due to high hazard or high vulnerability of societies and systems exposed, or both. Identification of key risks was based on expert judgment using the following specific criteria: large magnitude, high probability, or irreversibility of impacts; timing of impacts; persistent vulnerability or exposure contributing to risks; or limited potential to reduce risks through adaptation or mitigation. Key risks are integrated into five complementary and overarching reasons for concern (RFCs) in Assessment Box SPM.1. For each key risk, risk levels were assessed for three timeframes. For the present, risk levels were estimated for current adaptation and a hypothetical highly adapted state, identifying where current adaptation deficits exist. For two future timeframes, risk levels were estimated for a continuation of current adaptation and for a highly adapted state, representing the potential for and limits to adaptation. The risk levels integrate probability and consequence over the widest possible range of potential outcomes, based on available literature. These potential outcomes result from the interaction of climate-related hazards, vulnerability, and exposure. Each risk level reflects total risk from climatic and non-climatic factors. Key risks and risk levels vary across regions and over time, given differing socioeconomic development pathways, vulnerability and exposure to hazards, adaptive capacity, and risk perceptions. Risk levels are not necessarily comparable, especially across regions, because the assessment considers potential impacts and adaptation in different physical, biological, and human systems across diverse contexts. This assessment of risks acknowledges the importance of differences in values and objectives in interpretation of the assessed risk levels. Assessment Box SPM.2 Table 1: Key regional risks from climate change and the potential for reducing risks through adaptation and mitigation. Each key risk is characterized as very low to very high for three timeframes: the present, near-term (here, assessed over 2030-2040), and longer-term (here, assessed over 2080-2100). In the near-term, projected levels of global mean temperature increase do not diverge substantially for different emission scenarios. For the longer-term, risk levels are presented for two scenarios of global mean temperature increase (2°C and 4°C above preindustrial levels). These scenarios illustrate the potential for mitigation and adaptation to reduce the risks related to climate change. Climate-related drivers of impacts are indicated by icons.