skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: From land use to land cover: Restoring the afforestation signal in a coupled integrated assessment - earth system model and the implications for CMIP5 RCP simulations

Abstract

Climate projections depend on scenarios of fossil fuel emissions and land use change, and the IPCC AR5 parallel process assumes consistent climate scenarios across Integrated Assessment and Earth System Models (IAMs and ESMs). To facilitate consistency, CMIP5 used a novel land use harmonization to provide ESMs with seamless, 1500-2100 land use trajectories generated by historical data and four IAMs. However, we have identified and partially addressed a major gap in the CMIP5 land coupling design. The CMIP5 Community ESM (CESM) global afforestation is only 22% of RCP4.5 afforestation from 2005 to 2100. Likewise, only 17% of the Global Change Assessment Model’s (GCAM’s) 2040 RCP4.5 afforestation signal, and none of the pasture loss, were transmitted to CESM within a newly integrated model. This is a critical problem because afforestation is necessary for achieving the RCP4.5 climate stabilization. We attempted to rectify this problem by modifying only the ESM component of the integrated model, enabling CESM to simulate 66% of GCAM’s afforestation in 2040, and 94% of GCAM’s pasture loss as grassland and shrubland losses. This additional afforestation increases vegetation carbon gain by 19 PgC and decreases atmospheric CO2 gain by 8 ppmv from 2005 to 2040, implying different climate scenarios betweenmore » CMIP5 GCAM and CESM. Similar inconsistencies likely exist in other CMIP5 model results, primarily because land cover information is not shared between models, with possible contributions from afforestation exceeding model-specific, potentially viable forest area. Further work to harmonize land cover among models will be required to adequately rectify this problem.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [3];  [4];  [4];  [1];  [1];  [3];  [1];  [1];  [3];  [2];  [4];  [3]
  1. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States)
  2. Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD (United States)
  3. Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
  4. Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States). Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF); Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Science (SC)
OSTI Identifier:
1166830
Report Number(s):
PNNL-SA-101139
Journal ID: ISSN 1726-4170; KP1703020
DOE Contract Number:  
AC05-76RL01830
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Journal Name:
Biogeosciences
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 11; Journal Issue: 23; Journal ID: ISSN 1726-4170
Publisher:
European Geosciences Union
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; earth system modeling; climate change; land use

Citation Formats

Di Vittorio, Alan V., Chini, Louise M., Bond-Lamberty, Benjamin, Mao, Jiafu, Shi, Xiaoying, Truesdale, John E., Craig, Anthony P., Calvin, Katherine V., Jones, Andrew D., Collins, William D., Edmonds, James A., Hurtt, George, Thornton, Peter E., and Thomson, Allison M. From land use to land cover: Restoring the afforestation signal in a coupled integrated assessment - earth system model and the implications for CMIP5 RCP simulations. United States: N. p., 2014. Web. doi:10.5194/bg-11-6435-2014.
Di Vittorio, Alan V., Chini, Louise M., Bond-Lamberty, Benjamin, Mao, Jiafu, Shi, Xiaoying, Truesdale, John E., Craig, Anthony P., Calvin, Katherine V., Jones, Andrew D., Collins, William D., Edmonds, James A., Hurtt, George, Thornton, Peter E., & Thomson, Allison M. From land use to land cover: Restoring the afforestation signal in a coupled integrated assessment - earth system model and the implications for CMIP5 RCP simulations. United States. doi:10.5194/bg-11-6435-2014.
Di Vittorio, Alan V., Chini, Louise M., Bond-Lamberty, Benjamin, Mao, Jiafu, Shi, Xiaoying, Truesdale, John E., Craig, Anthony P., Calvin, Katherine V., Jones, Andrew D., Collins, William D., Edmonds, James A., Hurtt, George, Thornton, Peter E., and Thomson, Allison M. Thu . "From land use to land cover: Restoring the afforestation signal in a coupled integrated assessment - earth system model and the implications for CMIP5 RCP simulations". United States. doi:10.5194/bg-11-6435-2014.
@article{osti_1166830,
title = {From land use to land cover: Restoring the afforestation signal in a coupled integrated assessment - earth system model and the implications for CMIP5 RCP simulations},
author = {Di Vittorio, Alan V. and Chini, Louise M. and Bond-Lamberty, Benjamin and Mao, Jiafu and Shi, Xiaoying and Truesdale, John E. and Craig, Anthony P. and Calvin, Katherine V. and Jones, Andrew D. and Collins, William D. and Edmonds, James A. and Hurtt, George and Thornton, Peter E. and Thomson, Allison M.},
abstractNote = {Climate projections depend on scenarios of fossil fuel emissions and land use change, and the IPCC AR5 parallel process assumes consistent climate scenarios across Integrated Assessment and Earth System Models (IAMs and ESMs). To facilitate consistency, CMIP5 used a novel land use harmonization to provide ESMs with seamless, 1500-2100 land use trajectories generated by historical data and four IAMs. However, we have identified and partially addressed a major gap in the CMIP5 land coupling design. The CMIP5 Community ESM (CESM) global afforestation is only 22% of RCP4.5 afforestation from 2005 to 2100. Likewise, only 17% of the Global Change Assessment Model’s (GCAM’s) 2040 RCP4.5 afforestation signal, and none of the pasture loss, were transmitted to CESM within a newly integrated model. This is a critical problem because afforestation is necessary for achieving the RCP4.5 climate stabilization. We attempted to rectify this problem by modifying only the ESM component of the integrated model, enabling CESM to simulate 66% of GCAM’s afforestation in 2040, and 94% of GCAM’s pasture loss as grassland and shrubland losses. This additional afforestation increases vegetation carbon gain by 19 PgC and decreases atmospheric CO2 gain by 8 ppmv from 2005 to 2040, implying different climate scenarios between CMIP5 GCAM and CESM. Similar inconsistencies likely exist in other CMIP5 model results, primarily because land cover information is not shared between models, with possible contributions from afforestation exceeding model-specific, potentially viable forest area. Further work to harmonize land cover among models will be required to adequately rectify this problem.},
doi = {10.5194/bg-11-6435-2014},
journal = {Biogeosciences},
issn = {1726-4170},
number = 23,
volume = 11,
place = {United States},
year = {2014},
month = {11}
}

Works referenced in this record:

Observational and modeling studies of the impacts of agriculture-related land use change on planetary boundary layer processes in the central U.S.
journal, February 2007


Evaluating the Land and Ocean Components of the Global Carbon Cycle in the CMIP5 Earth System Models
journal, September 2013


Climate Sensitivity of the Community Climate System Model, Version 4
journal, May 2012


Coupling earth system and integrated assessment models: the problem of steady state
journal, January 2014

  • Bond-Lamberty, B.; Calvin, K.; Jones, A. D.
  • Geoscientific Model Development Discussions, Vol. 7, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmdd-7-1499-2014

Climatic Impacts of Land-Use Change due to Crop Yield Increases and a Universal Carbon Tax from a Scenario Model
journal, February 2014


Climate–Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C 4 MIP Model Intercomparison
journal, July 2006

  • Friedlingstein, P.; Cox, P.; Betts, R.
  • Journal of Climate, Vol. 19, Issue 14
  • DOI: 10.1175/JCLI3800.1

The Community Climate System Model Version 4
journal, October 2011

  • Gent, Peter R.; Danabasoglu, Gokhan; Donner, Leo J.
  • Journal of Climate, Vol. 24, Issue 19
  • DOI: 10.1175/2011JCLI4083.1

How well do we know the flux of CO 2 from land-use change?
journal, January 2010


Carbon emissions from land use and land-cover change
journal, January 2012


Projecting the future of the U.S. carbon sink
journal, February 2002

  • Hurtt, G. C.; Pacala, S. W.; Moorcroft, P. R.
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 99, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.012249999

CO 2 emissions from land-use change affected more by nitrogen cycle, than by the choice of land-cover data
journal, April 2013

  • Jain, Atul K.; Meiyappan, Prasanth; Song, Yang
  • Global Change Biology, Vol. 19, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12207

Greenhouse Gas Policy Influences Climate via Direct Effects of Land-Use Change
journal, June 2013


Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Variability in the Community Earth System Model: Evaluation and Transient Dynamics during the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries
journal, July 2013

  • Keppel-Aleks, Gretchen; Randerson, James T.; Lindsay, Keith
  • Journal of Climate, Vol. 26, Issue 13, p. 4447-4475
  • DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00589.1

The HYDE 3.1 spatially explicit database of human-induced global land-use change over the past 12,000 years: HYDE 3.1 Holocene land use
journal, September 2010


Parameterization improvements and functional and structural advances in Version 4 of the Community Land Model
journal, January 2011

  • Lawrence, David M.; Oleson, Keith W.; Flanner, Mark G.
  • Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, Vol. 3, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1029/2011MS000045

An emission pathway for stabilization at 6 Wm−2 radiative forcing
journal, August 2011


Climate Model Intercomparisons: Preparing for the Next Phase
journal, March 2014

  • Meehl, Gerald A.; Moss, Richard; Taylor, Karl E.
  • Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, Vol. 95, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.1002/2014EO090001

The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment
journal, February 2010

  • Moss, Richard H.; Edmonds, Jae A.; Hibbard, Kathy A.
  • Nature, Vol. 463, Issue 7282
  • DOI: 10.1038/nature08823

Uncertainties in climate responses to past land cover change: First results from the LUCID intercomparison study
journal, January 2009

  • Pitman, A. J.; de Noblet-Ducoudré, N.; Cruz, F. T.
  • Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 36, Issue 14
  • DOI: 10.1029/2009GL039076

Estimating historical changes in global land cover: Croplands from 1700 to 1992
journal, December 1999

  • Ramankutty, Navin; Foley, Jonathan A.
  • Global Biogeochemical Cycles, Vol. 13, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1029/1999GB900046

Using Land To Mitigate Climate Change: Hitting the Target, Recognizing the Trade-offs
journal, May 2012

  • Reilly, John; Melillo, Jerry; Cai, Yongxia
  • Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 46, Issue 11
  • DOI: 10.1021/es2034729

RCP 8.5—A scenario of comparatively high greenhouse gas emissions
journal, August 2011


Land-based mitigation in climate stabilization
journal, January 2012


Carbon cycling under 300 years of land use change: Importance of the secondary vegetation sink: CARBON CYCLING AND LAND USE IN LM3V
journal, June 2009

  • Shevliakova, Elena; Pacala, Stephen W.; Malyshev, Sergey
  • Global Biogeochemical Cycles, Vol. 23, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1029/2007GB003176

Historical warming reduced due to enhanced land carbon uptake
journal, September 2013

  • Shevliakova, E.; Stouffer, R. J.; Malyshev, S.
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 110, Issue 42
  • DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1314047110

How much land-based greenhouse gas mitigation can be achieved without compromising food security and environmental goals?
journal, May 2013

  • Smith, Pete; Haberl, Helmut; Popp, Alexander
  • Global Change Biology, Vol. 19, Issue 8
  • DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12160

Carbon density and anthropogenic land-use influences on net land-use change emissions
journal, January 2013


An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design
journal, April 2012

  • Taylor, Karl E.; Stouffer, Ronald J.; Meehl, Gerald A.
  • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Vol. 93, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1

RCP4.5: a pathway for stabilization of radiative forcing by 2100
journal, July 2011

  • Thomson, Allison M.; Calvin, Katherine V.; Smith, Steven J.
  • Climatic Change, Vol. 109, Issue 1-2
  • DOI: 10.1007/s10584-011-0151-4

Influence of carbon-nitrogen cycle coupling on land model response to CO 2 fertilization and climate variability : INFLUENCE OF CARBON-NITROGEN COUPLING
journal, December 2007

  • Thornton, Peter E.; Lamarque, Jean-François; Rosenbloom, Nan A.
  • Global Biogeochemical Cycles, Vol. 21, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.1029/2006GB002868

The representative concentration pathways: an overview
journal, August 2011


RCP2.6: exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2°C
journal, August 2011

  • van Vuuren, Detlef P.; Stehfest, Elke; den Elzen, Michel G. J.
  • Climatic Change, Vol. 109, Issue 1-2
  • DOI: 10.1007/s10584-011-0152-3

Comparing the influence of net and gross anthropogenic land-use and land-cover changes on the carbon cycle in the MPI-ESM
journal, January 2014


Implications of Limiting CO2 Concentrations for Land Use and Energy
journal, May 2009