IPCC AR6报告解读：地球能量收支、气候反馈和气候敏感度

doi:10.12006/j.issn.1673-1719.2021.191

气候变化研究进展 ›› 2021, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (6): 691-698.doi: 10.12006/j.issn.1673-1719.2021.191

• IPCC第六次评估报告WGI专栏 • 上一篇下一篇

IPCC AR6报告解读：地球能量收支、气候反馈和气候敏感度

张华¹^,²^,³(), 王菲²^,¹, 赵树云³^,²(), 谢冰⁴

1 中国气象科学研究院灾害天气国家重点实验室,北京 100081
2 南京信息工程大学气象灾害预报预警与评估协同创新中心,南京 210044
3 中国地质大学环境学院大气科学系,武汉 430078
4 中国气象局-南京大学气候预测研究联合实验室,北京 100081

收稿日期:2021-08-25 修回日期:2021-09-14 出版日期:2021-11-30 发布日期:2021-10-09
通讯作者: 赵树云
作者简介:张华,女,研究员, huazhang@cma.gov.cn
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划(2017YFA0603502);国家自然科学基金重点项目(91644211);中国气象科学研究院科技发展基金(2021KJ004)

Earth’s energy budget, climate feedbacks, and climate sensitivity

ZHANG Hua¹^,²^,³(), WANG Fei²^,¹, ZHAO Shu-Yun³^,²(), XIE Bing⁴

1 State Key Laboratory of Severe Weather, Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
2 Key Laboratory of Meteorological Disaster, Ministry of Education & Collaborative Innovation Center on Forecast and Evaluation of Meteorological Disaster, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China
3 Department of Atmospheric Science, School of Environmental Studies, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430078, China
4 CMA?NJU Joint Laboratory for Climate Prediction Studies, Beijing 100081, China

Received:2021-08-25 Revised:2021-09-14 Online:2021-11-30 Published:2021-10-09
Contact: ZHAO Shu-Yun

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

文中对IPCC第六次评估报告（AR6）第一工作组（WGI）报告的第七章关于地球能量收支、气候反馈和气候敏感度中的重要内容进行了凝练,并简要总结该方面的最新研究成果和结论。评估显示,自工业革命以来,人类活动造成的有效辐射强迫（ERF）为2.72 [1.96~3.48] W/m²,其中,均匀混合温室气体的贡献为3.32 [3.03~3.61] W/m²,气溶胶的贡献为-1.1 [-1.7~-0.4] W/m²。净的气候反馈参数为-1.16 [-1.81~-0.51] W/(m²∙℃),云仍然是气候反馈整体不确定性的最大来源。平衡态气候敏感度（ECS）和瞬态气候响应（TCR）可用于评估全球平均地表气温对强迫的响应,是衡量全球气候响应的有效手段。ECS和TCR的最佳估计分别为3.0 [2.0~5.0]℃和1.8 [1.2~2.4]℃。

关键词: 有效辐射强迫（ERF）, 气候反馈, 平衡态气候敏感度（ECS）, 瞬态气候响应（TCR）

Abstract:

This work extracts the chapter seven of the IPCC AR6 working group I on the Earth’s energy budget, climate feedback, and climate sensitivity, and gives a concise summary on the new findings and conclusions on the topic. AR6 suggests that the effective radiative forcing (ERF) from anthropogenic activity over the industrial era is 2.72 [1.96-3.48] W/m². Changes in well-mixed greenhouse gases and aerosols contribute to the total anthropogenic ERF with 3.32 [3.03-3.61] W/m² and -1.1 [-1.7--0.4] W/m², respectively. The net climate feedback parameter is assessed to be -1.16 [-1.81--0.51] W/(m²∙℃), and clouds remain the largest contribution to overall uncertainty in climate feedbacks. Equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) and transient climate response (TCR) are effective measures that can be used to assess the response of global mean surface air temperature to forcing factors. The best estimates of ECS and TCR are 3.0 [2.0-5.0]℃ and 1.8 [1.2-2.4]℃, respectively.

Key words: Effective radiative forcing (ERF), Climate feedback, Equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS), Transient climate response (TCR)

张华, 王菲, 赵树云, 谢冰. IPCC AR6报告解读：地球能量收支、气候反馈和气候敏感度[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2021, 17(6): 691-698.

ZHANG Hua, WANG Fei, ZHAO Shu-Yun, XIE Bing. Earth’s energy budget, climate feedbacks, and climate sensitivity[J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(6): 691-698.

图/表 5

图1 21世纪初期全天和晴空条件下全球平均的地球能量收支示意图[5] 注：图中数值表示全球平均能量平衡各分量的最佳估计值,括号内数值为晴空条件下能量通量的最佳估计值。

Fig. 1 Schematic representation of the global mean energy budget of the Earth under all-sky and clear-sky conditions at the beginning of the 21st century [5]. (Numbers indicate best estimates for the magnitudes of the globally averaged energy balance components together with their counterparts under clear-sky conditions)

图2 1750—2019年不同因子的有效辐射强迫的变化和不确定性[5] 注：信度区间为5%~95%。图3同。

Fig. 2 Change in effective radiative forcing for different factors from 1750 to 2019 [5](Uncertainty ranges of 5%-95% confidence range are also given)

图3 1750—2019年间不同强迫因子对全球平均地表气温（GSAT）的贡献以及不确定性[5]

Fig. 3 Contributions from different forcing factors to the global mean surface air temperature change from 1750 to 2019 [5]. (Uncertainties of 5%-95% confidence range are also given as shades)

表1 对气候反馈的综合评估[5]

Table 1 Synthesis assessment of climate feedbacks [5] W/(m2∙℃)

表2 对平衡态气候敏感度（ECS）和瞬态气候响应（TCR）的评估总结[5]

Table 2 Summary of equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) and transient climate response (TCR) assessment [5] ℃

参考文献 24

[1]	Brown P T, Li W, Li L, et al. Top-of-atmosphere radiative contribution to unforced decadal global temperature variability in climate models[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2014, 41(14): 5175-5183 doi: 10.1002/2014GL060625 URL
[2]	Palmer M D, McNeall D J. Internal variability of Earth’s energy budget simulated by CMIP5 climate models[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2014, 9(3): 034016 doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/9/3/034016 URL
[3]	Trenberth K E, Fasullo J T, Balmaseda M A. Earth’s energy imbalance[J]. Journal of Climate, 2014, 27(9): 3129-3144 doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00294.1 URL
[4]	von Schuckmann K, Palmer M D, Trenberth K E, et al. An imperative to monitor Earth’s energy imbalance[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2016, 6(2): 138-144 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2876 URL
[5]	IPCC. Climate change 2021: the physical science basis [M/OL]. 2021 [2021-08-09]. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter_07.pdf
[6]	Devaraju N, Bala G, Nemani R. Modelling the influence of land-use changes on biophysical and biochemical interactions at regional and global scales[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2015, 38(9): 1931-1946
[7]	Meraner K, Mauritsen T, Voigt A. Robust increase in equilibrium climate sensitivity under global warming[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2013, 40(22): 5944-5948 doi: 10.1002/grl.v40.22 URL
[8]	Caballero R, Huber M. State-dependent climate sensitivity in past warm climates and its implications for future climate projections[J]. Proceedings of The National Academy of Sciences, 2013, 110(35): 14162 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1303365110 URL
[9]	Rugenstein M, Bloch-Johnson J, Gregory J, et al. Equilibrium climate sensitivity estimated by equilibrating climate models [J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2020, 47 (4): e2019GL083898
[10]	Zhu J, Poulsen C J, Tierney J E. Simulation of Eocene extreme warmth and high climate sensitivity through cloud feedbacks [J]. Science Advances, 2019, 5 (9): eaax1874
[11]	Sherwood S C, Webb M J, Annan J D, et al. An assessment of Earth's climate sensitivity using multiple lines of evidence [J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 2020, 58 (4): e2019RG000678
[12]	Jonko A K, Shell K M, Sanderson B M, et al. Climate feedbacks in CCSM3 under changing CO₂ forcing. Part II: variation of climate feedbacks and sensitivity with forcing[J]. Journal of Climate, 2013, 26(9): 2784-2795 doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00479.1 URL
[13]	Mauritsen T, Bader J, Becker T, et al. Developments in the MPI-M Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI-ESM1.2) and its response to increasing CO₂[J]. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 2019, 11(4): 998-1038 doi: 10.1029/2018MS001400 pmid: 32742553
[14]	Duan L, Cao L, Caldeira K. Estimating contributions of sea ice and land snow to climate feedback[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2019, 124(1): 199-208 doi: 10.1029/2018JD029093 URL
[15]	Stolpe M B, Medhaug I, Beyerle U, et al. Weak dependence of future global mean warming on the background climate state[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2019, 53(7): 5079-5099 doi: 10.1007/s00382-019-04849-3 URL
[16]	Grose M R, Gregory J, Colman R, et al. What climate sensitivity index is most useful for projections?[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2018, 45(3): 1559-1566 doi: 10.1002/grl.v45.3 URL
[17]	Flynn C M, Mauritsen T. On the climate sensitivity and historical warming evolution in recent coupled model ensembles[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2020, 20(13): 7829-7842
[18]	Hansen J, Russell G, Lacis A, et al. Climate response times: dependence on climate sensitivity and ocean mixing[J]. Science, 1985, 229(4716): 857 pmid: 17777925
[19]	Knutti R, Joos F, Müller S A, et al. Probabilistic climate change projections for CO₂ stabilization profiles[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2005, 32(20): L20707 doi: 10.1029/2005GL023294 URL
[20]	Millar R J, Otto A, Forster P M, et al. Model structure in observational constraints on transient climate response[J]. Climatic Change, 2015, 131(2): 199-211 doi: 10.1007/s10584-015-1384-4 URL
[21]	Tsutsui J. Diagnosing transient response to CO₂ forcing in coupled atmosphere-ocean model experiments using a climate model emulator [J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2020, 47 (7): e2019GL085844
[22]	Zhou C, Zelinka M D, Klein S A. Impact of decadal cloud variations on the Earth’s energy budget[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2016, 9: 871-874 doi: 10.1038/ngeo2828 URL
[23]	Vial J, Dufresne J L, Bony S. On the interpretation of inter-model spread in CMIP5 climate sensitivity estimates[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2013, 41(11): 3339-3362 doi: 10.1007/s00382-013-1725-9 URL
[24]	Zelinka M D, Myers T A, McCoy D T, et al. Causes of higher climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models [J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2020, 47 (1): e2019GL085782

IPCC AR6报告解读：地球能量收支、气候反馈和气候敏感度

Earth’s energy budget, climate feedbacks, and climate sensitivity

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 24

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价