|
Climate Change Research ›› 2021, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (6): 664-670.doi: 10.12006/j.issn.1673-1719.2021.169
• Special Section on the Sixth Assessment Report of IPCC: WGI • Previous Articles Next Articles
Received:
2021-08-05
Revised:
2021-09-21
Online:
2021-11-30
Published:
2021-10-09
CAO Long. Climate system response to carbon dioxide removal[J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(6): 664-670.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.climatechange.cn/EN/10.12006/j.issn.1673-1719.2021.169
Fig. 1 Carbon cycle response to instantaneous carbon dioxide (CO2) removal from the atmosphere. (a) Atmospheric CO2 concentration, (b) change in land carbon reservoir, (c) change in ocean carbon reservoir. (Results are shown for simulations with seven CMIP6 Earth system models and the UVic ESCM model of intermediate complexity forced with 100 Pg C instantaneously removed from the atmosphere)
Fig. 2 Delayed climate response to CDR-caused net negative CO2 emissions[1]. (a) Normalized ensemble mean anomaly of key variables, (b) global surface air temperature, (c) precipitation, (d) September Arctic sea-ice area, (e) Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC), (f) thermostatic sea level. (In (a), the key variables include atmospheric CO2, surface air temperature, precipitation, thermosteric sea-level rise, global sea-ice area, Northern Hemisphere sea-ice area in September, and AMOC. In (b)-(f), red lines represent the phase of CO2 ramp-up, blue lines represent the phase of CO2 ramp-down, brown lines represent the period after CO2 has returned to pre-industrial level, and black lines represent the multi-model mean. For all of the segments in (b)-(f), the solid colored lines are CMIP6 models, and the dashed lines are other models. Vertical dashed lines indicate peak CO2 and when CO2 again reaches pre-industrial value. The number of CMIP6 and non-CMIP6 models used is indicated in each panel)
[1] | IPCC. Climate change 2021: the physical science basis [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021 |
[2] |
Jan C M, William F L, Max W C, et al. Negative emissions. Part 1: research landscape and synjournal[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2018, 13(6): 063001. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9b
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9b URL |
[3] |
Rickels W, Reith F, Keller D, et al. Integrated assessment of carbon dioxide removal[J]. Earth’s Future, 2018, 6(3): 565-582. DOI: 10.1002/2017ef000724
doi: 10.1002/2017ef000724 URL |
[4] |
Rogelj J, Popp A, Calvin K V, et al. Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5℃[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2018, 8(4): 325-332. DOI: 10.1038/s41558-018-0091-3
doi: 10.1038/s41558-018-0091-3 |
[5] | The Royal Society. Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty [R]. London: RS Policy Document 10/09, The Royal Society, 2009: 82 |
[6] |
IPCC. Climate change 2013: the physical science basis [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013: 571-658. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.016
doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.016 |
[7] |
Keller D P, Lenton A, Scott V, et al. The carbon dioxide removal model intercomparison project (CDRMIP): rationale and experimental protocol for CMIP6[J]. Geoscientific Model Development, 2018, 11(3): 1133-1160. DOI: 10.5194/gmd-11-1133-2018
doi: 10.5194/gmd-11-1133-2018 URL |
[8] |
Zickfeld K, Azevedo D, Mathesius S, et al. Asymmetry in the climate: carbon cycle response to positive and negative CO2 emissions[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2021, 11: 613-617. DOI: 10.1038/s41558-021-01061-2
doi: 10.1038/s41558-021-01061-2 URL |
[9] |
Tokarska K B, Zickfeld K. The effectiveness of net negative carbon dioxide emissions in reversing anthropogenic climate change[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2015, 10(9): 094013. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/10/9/094013
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/10/9/094013 URL |
[10] |
Jackson R B, Milne J, Littleton E W, et al. Simulating the Earth system response to negative emissions[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2016, 11(9): 095012. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/9/095012
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/9/095012 URL |
[11] |
MacDougall A H. Reversing climate warming by artificial atmospheric carbon dioxide removal: can a holocene-like climate be restored?[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2013, 40(20): 5480-5485
doi: 10.1002/2013GL057467 URL |
[12] |
Zickfeld K, MacDougall A H, Matthews H D. On the proportionality between global temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions during periods of net negative CO2 emissions[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2016, 11(5): 055006. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/ 5/055006
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/ 5/055006 URL |
[13] |
Schwinger J, Tjiputra J. Ocean carbon cycle feedbacks under negative emissions[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2018, 45(10): 5062-5070. DOI: 10.1029/2018gl077790
doi: 10.1029/2018gl077790 URL |
[14] |
Jackson L C, Schaller N, Smith R S, et al. Response of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation to a reversal of greenhouse gas increases[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2014, 42(11-12): 3323-3336
doi: 10.1007/s00382-013-1842-5 URL |
[15] |
Sgubin G, Swingedouw D, Drijfhout S, et al. Multimodel analysis on the response of the AMOC under an increase of radiative forcing and its symmetrical reversal[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2015, 45(5-6): 1429-1450. DOI: 10.1007/s00382-014-2391-2
doi: 10.1007/s00382-014-2391-2 URL |
[16] |
Jeltsch-Thömmes A, Stocker T F, Joos F. Hysteresis of the Earth system under positive and negative CO2 emissions[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2020, 15(12): 124026. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/abc4af
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/abc4af URL |
[17] |
Oschlies A, Pahlow M, Yool A, et al. Climate engineering by artificial ocean upwelling: channeling the sorcerer’s apprentice[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2010, 37(4): 1-5. DOI: 10.1029/2009gl041961
doi: 10.1029/2009gl041961 |
[18] |
Keller D P, Feng E Y, Oschlies A. Potential climate engineering effectiveness and side effects during a high carbon dioxide-emission scenario[J]. Nature Communications, 2014, 5(1): 3304. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms4304
doi: 10.1038/ncomms4304 URL |
[19] |
González M F, Ilyina T, Sonntag S, et al. Enhanced rates of regional warming and ocean acidification after termination of large-scale ocean alkalization[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2018, 45(14): 7120-7129. DOI: 10.1029/2018gl077847
doi: 10.1029/2018gl077847 URL |
[20] | Boyd P, Vivian C, Boettcher M, et al. High level review of a wide range of proposed marine geoengineering techniques [R/OL]. 2019 [2021-08-05]. http://www.gesamp.org/publications/high-level-review-of-a-wide-range-of-proposed-marine-geoengineering-techniques |
[21] |
Keller D P. Marine climate engineering[M]//Salomon M, Markus T. Handbook on marine environment protection: science, impacts and sustainable management. Cham: Springer, 2019: 261-276. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-60156-4_13
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-60156-4_13 |
[22] |
Hauck J, Köhler P, Wolf-Gladrow D, et al. Iron fertilization and century-scale effects of open ocean dissolution of olivine in a simulated CO2 removal experiment[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2016, 11(2): 024007. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/2/024007
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/2/024007 URL |
[23] |
Tran G T, Oschlies A, Keller D P. Comparative assessment of climate engineering scenarios in the presence of parametric uncertainty[J]. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 2020, 12(4). DOI: 10.1029/2019ms001787
doi: 10.1029/2019ms001787 |
[24] |
Bach L T, Gill S J Rickaby R E M, et al. CO2 removal with enhanced weathering and ocean alkalinity enhancement: potential risks and co-benefits for marine pelagic ecosystems[J]. Frontiers in Climate, 2019, 1. DOI: 10.3389/fclim.2019.00007
doi: 10.3389/fclim.2019.00007 |
[25] |
Pete S, Steven J D, Felix C, et al. Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2016, 6(1): 42-45, 50. DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2870
doi: 10.1038/nclimate2870 URL |
[26] |
NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). Negative emissions technologies and reliable sequestration: a research agenda [M]. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2019: 510. DOI: 10.17226/25259
doi: 10.17226/25259 |
[27] |
Fuss S, Lamb W F, Callaghan M W, et al. Negative emissions. Part 2: costs, potentials and side effects[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2018, 13(6): 063002. DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9f
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9f URL |
[1] | CAO Long. Climate system response to solar radiation modification [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(6): 671-684. |
[2] | LIAO Hong, XIE Pei-Fu. The roles of short-lived climate forcers in a changing climate [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(6): 685-690. |
[3] | ZUO Zhi-Yan, XIAO Dong. Linking global to regional climate change [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(6): 705-712. |
[4] | WANG Wen, FU Wen-Rui. The Climatic Impact-Driver framework [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(6): 719-725. |
[5] | ZHAI Pan-Mao, ZHOU Bai-Quan, CHEN Yang, YU Rong. Several new understandings in the climate change science [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(6): 629-635. |
[6] | WANG Mou, KANG Wen-Mei, ZHANG Ying. Discussion on the method of selecting priority aid countries for South-South Cooperation to address climate change [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(6): 744-752. |
[7] | HE Jia-Jun, REN Guo-Yu, ZHANG Pan-Feng. Effects of data homogenization on the estimates of temperature trend and urbanization bias: taking Beijing area as an example [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(5): 503-513. |
[8] | LIU Lei. Mainstreaming gender in actions on climate change [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(5): 548-558. |
[9] | WU Zhan-Yun. Integrating adaptation to climate change into territorial spatial planning: progress, dilemma and strategy [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(5): 559-569. |
[10] | YU Xiao-Long, LIU Yuan. Evaluation of China’s material donation projects to address climate change within South-South Cooperation [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(5): 608-620. |
[11] | LIU Yuan, WANG Fang, ZHANG Zheng-Tao, HUANG Cheng-Fang, CHEN Xi, LI Ning. Comprehensive assessment of “climate change-crop yield-economic impact” in seven sub-regions of China [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(4): 455-465. |
[12] | WANG Xin-Xin, SHI Xing-Min. Visual and quantitative analysis of climate change perception and adaptive behavior research [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(4): 466-475. |
[13] | SUN You-Yuan, GUO Zhen, ZHANG Ji-Guang, QIN Ya-Qi. Research on cost analysis and competitiveness of power generation units under the influence of carbon market and power market coupling mechanism [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(4): 476-483. |
[14] | SHU Zhang-Kang, ZHANG Jian-Yun, JIN Jun-Liang, WANG Guo-Qing, WANG Lin, CAO Min-Xiong. Evolution characters and causes of the dry season runoff for the major rivers in China during 1961-2018 [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(3): 340-351. |
[15] | SHANG Hua-Ming, FAN Yu-Ting, ZHANG Rui-Bo, YU Shu-Long, ZHANG Tong-Wen, WEI Wen-Shou, Liu Wei-Ping. Streamflow variation in the eastern Pamirs and its response to climate change [J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17(3): 352-360. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||
|