This paper evaluates the IPCC SRES scenarios against fossil fuel depletion models and proposes attainable carbon emissions trajectories. The contemporary carbon feedback cycle is then evaluated in light of recent studies and attainable carbon emissions. In light of deficiencies in the contemporary carbon feedback cycle, a parametric carbon feedback model is constructed that is consistent with empirical evidence. A radiative feedback model, that overestimates transient response when used in conjunction with equilibrium climate sensitivity, is then used in sensitivity studies to calculate the range of plausible global warming responses. The model predicts a maximum atmospheric concentration of CO2 in the range of 500–560ppm and a maximum global mean surface temperature increase of 1.5–2°C relative to year 2000.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
IPCC, (2007) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [SolomonSQinDManningMChenZMarquisMAverytKBTignorM, and MillerHL (editors)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2007.
2.
IPCC, IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios, http://www.ipcc.ch, (accessed December, 15 2008).
3.
ClarkeLEEdmondsJAJacobyHDPitcherHMReillyJMRichelsRG, (2007) Scenarios of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Atmospheric Concentrations, Synthesis and Assessment Product 2.1a Report by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research, 2007.
4.
WEC, (2007) Survey of Energy Resources 2007, World Energy Council, London.
5.
ASPO, Association for the Study of Peak Oil, www.peakoil.net, (accessed October 12, 2009).
6.
OwennNAInderwildiORKingDA, The status of conventional world oil reserves — Hype or cause for concern?Energy Policy doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.02.026 (Article in Press).
7.
NelWPCooperCJ, (2009) Implications of fossil fuel constraints on economic growth and global warming. Energy Policy37(1): 166–180.
HasselmannKHasselmannSGieringROcanaVv. StorchH, (1997) Sensitivity Study of Optimal CO2 Emission Paths Using a Simplified Structural Integrated Assessment Model (SIAM), Climatic Change37(2): 345–386.
10.
JoosFPrenticeICSitchS, (2001) Global warming feedbacks on terrestrial carbon uptake under the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) emission scenarios, Global Biochem. Cycles15(4), 891–907.
11.
RorschACourtneyRSThoenesD, (2005) The Interaction of Climate Change and the Carbon Dioxide Cycle, E&E16(2): 217–238.
12.
FriedlingsteinPCoxPBettsR, (2006) Climate-Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model Intercomparison, J Climate19(14): 3337–3353.
13.
JoosFBrunoMFinkR, (1996) An efficient and accurate representation of complex oceanic and biospheric models of anthropogenic carbon uptake, Tellus 48B3: 397–417.
14.
BP, Statistical Review of World Energy 2008, http://www.bp.com/, (accessed July, 2 2008).
15.
GeverJKaufmannRSkoleDVörösmartyC, (1986) Beyond Oil: The Threat to Food and Fuel in the Coming Decades, Ballinger, Cambridge, UK.
16.
ReynoldsDB, (2002) Scarcity and Growth Considering Oil and Energy: An Alternative Neo-Classical View, Edwin Mellen, USA.
17.
HöökMSivertssonAAleklettK, (2010) Validity of the fossil fuel production outlooks in the IPCC Emission Scenarios, Natural Resources Research, 10.1007/s11053-010-9113-1 (Article in press)
18.
HoosGVossRHasselmannKMaier-RiemanEJoosF, (2001) A nonlinear impulse response model of the coupled carbon cycle-climate system (NICCS). Climate Dynamics18: 189–202.
19.
Maier-RiemanEHasselmannK, (1987) Transport and storage CO2 in the ocean – an inorganic ocean-circulation carbon cycle model, Climate Dynamics2: 63–90.
20.
MooreBBraswellBH, (1994) The Lifetime of Excess Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide, Global Biogeochem. Cycles8(1): 23–38.
21.
KharechaPAHansenJ, (2008) Implications of “peak oil” for atmospheric CO2 and climate, Global Biogeochem. Cycles22, GB3012, doi:10.1029/2007GB003142.
22.
SiegenthalerUJoosF, (1992) Use of a simple model for studying oceanic tracer distributions and the global carbon cycle, Tellus 44B3: 186–207.
23.
SolomonSPlattnerGKKnuttiRFriedlingsteinP, (2009) Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions, PNAS106(6): 1704–1709
24.
HansenJSatoM, (2004) Greenhouse gas growth rates, PNAS101(46): 16109–16114.
25.
FungIYDoneySCLindsayKJohnJ, (2005) Evolution of carbon sinks in a changing climate, PNAS102(32): 11201–11206.
26.
CoxPMBettsRAJonesCDSpallSATotterdellIJ, (2000) Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model, Nature408: 184–187.
27.
KnorrW, (2009) Is the airborne fraction of anthropogenic CO2 emissions increasing?, Geophys. Res. Let., 36(21): L21710
28.
LindzenRSChouM-DHouAY, (2001) Does the Earth Have an Adaptive Infrared Iris?, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 82: 417–432.
29.
European Commission, Limiting global climate change to 2 degrees Celsius—the way ahead for 2020 and beyond, Commission Staff Working Document, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, http://europa.eu/press_room/presspacks/energy/iasec8.pdf/, 2007; (accessed July, 01 2008).
30.
HansenJSatoMKharechaPBeerlingDMasson-DelmotteVPaganiMRaymoMRoyerDLZachosJC, (2008) Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?, The Open Atmospheric Science Journal2: 217–231.
31.
ESRL, Earth System Research Laboratory, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/, (accessed May, 22 2008).
