Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

Greenhouse Gas Policy Influences Climate via Direct Effects of Land-Use Change

Andrew D. Jones * Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California

Search for other papers by Andrew D. Jones in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
William D. Collins * Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California

Search for other papers by William D. Collins in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
James Edmonds Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Joint Global Change Research Institute, College Park, Maryland

Search for other papers by James Edmonds in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Margaret S. Torn * Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California

Search for other papers by Margaret S. Torn in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Anthony Janetos Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Joint Global Change Research Institute, College Park, Maryland

Search for other papers by Anthony Janetos in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Katherine V. Calvin Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Joint Global Change Research Institute, College Park, Maryland

Search for other papers by Katherine V. Calvin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Allison Thomson Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Joint Global Change Research Institute, College Park, Maryland

Search for other papers by Allison Thomson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Louise P. Chini University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, Maryland

Search for other papers by Louise P. Chini in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Jiafu Mao Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Search for other papers by Jiafu Mao in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Xiaoying Shi Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Search for other papers by Xiaoying Shi in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Peter Thornton Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Search for other papers by Peter Thornton in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
George C. Hurtt University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, Maryland

Search for other papers by George C. Hurtt in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
Marshall Wise Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Joint Global Change Research Institute, College Park, Maryland

Search for other papers by Marshall Wise in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Jun 2013
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00377.1
Page(s):
3657–3670
Restricted access

Abstract

Proposed climate mitigation measures do not account for direct biophysical climate impacts of land-use change (LUC), nor do the stabilization targets modeled for phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) representative concentration pathways (RCPs). To examine the significance of such effects on global and regional patterns of climate change, a baseline and an alternative scenario of future anthropogenic activity are simulated within the Integrated Earth System Model, which couples the Global Change Assessment Model, Global Land-Use Model, and Community Earth System Model. The alternative scenario has high biofuel utilization and approximately 50% less global forest cover than the baseline, standard RCP4.5 scenario. Both scenarios stabilize radiative forcing from atmospheric constituents at 4.5 W m−2 by 2100. Thus, differences between their climate predictions quantify the biophysical effects of LUC. Offline radiative transfer and land model simulations are also utilized to identify forcing and feedback mechanisms driving the coupled response. Boreal deforestation is found to strongly influence climate because of increased albedo coupled with a regional-scale water vapor feedback. Globally, the alternative scenario yields a twenty-first-century warming trend that is 0.5°C cooler than baseline, driven by a 1 W m−2 mean decrease in radiative forcing that is distributed unevenly around the globe. Some regions are cooler in the alternative scenario than in 2005. These results demonstrate that neither climate change nor actual radiative forcing is uniquely related to atmospheric forcing targets such as those found in the RCPs but rather depend on particulars of the socioeconomic pathways followed to meet each target.

Corresponding author address: Andrew D. Jones, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Rd., MS 74-0171, Berkeley, CA 94720. E-mail: adjones@lbl.gov

Abstract

Proposed climate mitigation measures do not account for direct biophysical climate impacts of land-use change (LUC), nor do the stabilization targets modeled for phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) representative concentration pathways (RCPs). To examine the significance of such effects on global and regional patterns of climate change, a baseline and an alternative scenario of future anthropogenic activity are simulated within the Integrated Earth System Model, which couples the Global Change Assessment Model, Global Land-Use Model, and Community Earth System Model. The alternative scenario has high biofuel utilization and approximately 50% less global forest cover than the baseline, standard RCP4.5 scenario. Both scenarios stabilize radiative forcing from atmospheric constituents at 4.5 W m−2 by 2100. Thus, differences between their climate predictions quantify the biophysical effects of LUC. Offline radiative transfer and land model simulations are also utilized to identify forcing and feedback mechanisms driving the coupled response. Boreal deforestation is found to strongly influence climate because of increased albedo coupled with a regional-scale water vapor feedback. Globally, the alternative scenario yields a twenty-first-century warming trend that is 0.5°C cooler than baseline, driven by a 1 W m−2 mean decrease in radiative forcing that is distributed unevenly around the globe. Some regions are cooler in the alternative scenario than in 2005. These results demonstrate that neither climate change nor actual radiative forcing is uniquely related to atmospheric forcing targets such as those found in the RCPs but rather depend on particulars of the socioeconomic pathways followed to meet each target.

Corresponding author address: Andrew D. Jones, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Rd., MS 74-0171, Berkeley, CA 94720. E-mail: adjones@lbl.gov
Save
Cover Journal of Climate
Journal of Climate

  • Air Resources Board, 2009: Proposed regulation to implement the low carbon fuel standard. Volume I: Staff report: Initial statement of reasons. California Environmental Protection Agency Rep., 374 pp. [Available online at http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/030409lcfs_isor_vol1.pdf.]

  • Arora, V. K., and A. Montenegro, 2011: Small temperature benefits provided by realistic afforestation efforts. Nat. Geosci., 4, 514–518.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bala, G., K. Caldeira, M. Wickett, T. Phillips, D. Lobell, C. Delire, and A. Mirin, 2007: Combined climate and carbon-cycle effects of large-scale deforestation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 104, 6550–6555.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Betts, R., 2000: Offset of the potential carbon sink from boreal forestation by decreases in surface albedo. Nature, 408, 187–190.

  • Betts, R., P. Falloon, and K. Goldewijk, 2007: Biogeophysical effects of land use on climate: Model simulations of radiative forcing and large-scale temperature change. Agric. For. Meteor., 14, 216–233.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bitz, C. M., K. M. Shell, P. R. Gent, D. A. Bailey, G. Danabasoglu, K. C. Armour, M. M. Holland, and J. T. Kiehl, 2012: Climate sensitivity of the Community Climate System Model, version 4. J. Climate, 25, 3053–3070.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bonan, G. B., 2008: Forests and climate change: Forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science, 320, 1444–1449, doi:10.1126/science.1155121.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bonan, G. B., D. Pollard, and S. L. Thompson, 1992: Effects of boreal forest vegetation on global climate. Nature, 359, 716–718.

  • Conley, A. J., J.-F. Lamarque, F. Vitt, W. D. Collins, and J. Kiehl, 2012: PORT, a CESM tool for the diagnosis of radiative forcing. Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss.,5, 2687–2704.

  • FAO, 2008: UN-REDD: UN Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (UN-REDD). FAO, UNDP, and UNEP Framework Doc., 29 pp. [Available online at http://www.un-redd.org/Portals/15/documents/publications/UN-REDD_FrameworkDocument.pdf.]

  • Feddema, J. J., K. W. Oleson, G. B. Bonan, L. O. Mearns, L. E. Buja, G. A. Meehl, and W. M. Washington, 2005: The importance of land-cover change in simulating future climates. Science, 310, 1674–1678, doi:10.1126/science.1118160.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Findell, K. L., E. Shevliakova, P. C. D. Milly, and R. J. Stouffer, 2007: Modeled impact of anthropogenic land cover change on climate. J. Climate, 20, 3621–3634.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Foley, J., R. DeFries, G. Asner, and C. Barford, 2005: Global consequences of land use. Science, 309, 570–574.

  • Gedney, N., and P. Valdes, 2000: The effect of Amazonian deforestation on the Northern Hemisphere circulation and climate. Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 3053–3056.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gent, P. R, and Coauthors, 2011: The Community Climate System Model version 4. J. Climate, 24, 4973–4991.

  • Hasler, N., D. Werth, and R. Avissar, 2009: Effects of tropical deforestation on global hydroclimate: A multimodel ensemble analysis. J. Climate, 22, 1124–1141.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Hurtt, G. C., S. Frolking, M. G. Fearon, B. Moore, E. Shevliakova, S. Malyshev, S. Pacala, and R. A. Houghton, 2006: The underpinnings of land-use history: Three centuries of global gridded land-use transitions, wood-harvest activity, and resulting secondary lands. Global Change Biol., 12, 1208–1229.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Hurtt, G. C., and Coauthors, 2011: Harmonization of land-use scenarios for the period 1500–2100: 600 years of global gridded annual land-use transitions, wood harvest, and resulting secondary lands. Climatic Change, 109, 117–161, doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0153-2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Kim, S. H., J. Edmonds, J. Lurz, S. J. Smith, and M. Wise, 2006: The objECTS framework for integrated assessment: Hybrid modeling of transportation. Energy J.,27, 63–92.

  • Kvalevåg, M. M., G. Myhre, G. Bonan, and S. Levis, 2009: Anthropogenic land cover changes in a GCM with surface albedo changes based on MODIS data. Int. J. Climatol.,30, 2105–2117, doi:10.1002/joc.2012.

  • Lamarque, J. F., G. P. Kyle, M. Meinshausen, K. Riahi, S. J. Smith, D. P. van Vuuren, A. J. Conley, and F. Vitt, 2011: Global and regional evolution of short-lived radiatively-active gases and aerosols in the representative concentration pathways. Climatic Change, 109, 191–212.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Lawrence, D. M., K. W. Oleson, M. G. Flanner, C. G. Fletcher, P. J. Lawrence, S. Levis, S. C. Swenson, and G. B. Bonan, 2012: The CCSM4 land simulation, 1850–2005: Assessment of surface climate and new capabilities. J. Climate, 25, 2240–2260.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Lawrence, P. J., and T. N. Chase, 2010: Investigating the climate impacts of global land cover change in the Community Climate System Model. Int. J. Climatol.,30, 2066–2087, doi:10.1002/joc.2061.

  • Lawrence, P. J., and Coauthors, 2012: Simulating the biogeochemical and biogeophysical impacts of transient land cover change and wood harvest in the Community Climate System Model (CCSM4) from 1850 to 2100. J. Climate, 25, 3071–3095.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Levis, S., G. B. Bonan, E. Kluzek, P. E. Thornton, A. Jones, W. I. Sacks, and C. J. Kucharik, 2012: Interactive crop management in the Community Earth System Model (CESM1): Seasonal influences on land–atmosphere fluxes. J. Climate,25, 4839–4859.

  • Livezey, R., and W. Chen, 1983: Statistical field significance and its determination by Monte Carlo techniques. Mon. Wea. Rev., 111, 46–59.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Marland, G., and Coauthors, 2003: The climatic impacts of land surface change and carbon management, and the implications for climate-change mitigation policy. Climate Policy, 3, 149–157, doi:10.3763/cpol.2003.0318.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • McGuffie, K., A. Henderson-Sellers, H. Zhang, T. Durbidge, and A. Pitman, 1995: Global climate sensitivity to tropical deforestation. Global Planet. Change, 10, 97–128.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Meinshausen, M., S. Raper, and T. Wigley, 2011: Emulating coupled atmosphere-ocean and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6—Part 1: Model description and calibration. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 1417–1456.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Mitchell, T. D., 2003: Pattern scaling: an examination of the accuracy of the technique for describing future climates. Climatic Change, 60, 217–242.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Moss, R. H., and Coauthors, 2010: The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature, 463, 747–756, doi:10.1038/nature08823.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Neale, R. B., J. Richter, S. Park, P. H. Lauritzen, S. J. Vavrus, P. J. Rasch, and M. Zhang, 2013: The mean climate of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM4) in forced SST and fully coupled experiments. J. Climate, in press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Nepstad, D. C., C. M. Stickler, B. Soares-Filho, and F. Merry, 2008: Interactions among Amazon land use, forests and climate: Prospects for a near-term forest tipping point. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc., 363B, 1737–1746, doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.0036.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Pielke, R. A., Sr., G. Marland, R. A. Betts, T. N. Chase, J. L. Eastman, J. O. Niles, D. D. S. Niyogi, and S. W. Running, 2002: The influence of land-use change and landscape dynamics on the climate system: Relevance to climate-change policy beyond the radiative effect of greenhouse gases. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc., 360, 1705–1719.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Pitman, A. J., and Coauthors, 2009: Uncertainties in climate responses to past land cover change: First results from the LUCID intercomparison study. Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L14814, doi:10.1029/2009GL039076.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Santer, B. D., and Coauthors, 2004: Identification of anthropogenic climate change using a second-generation reanalysis. J. Geophys. Res., 109, D21104, doi:10.1029/2004JD005075.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Schlesinger, M. E., and Coauthors, 2000: Geographical distributions of temperature change for scenarios of greenhouse gas and sulfur dioxide emissions. Technol. Forecasting Soc. Change, 65, 167–193, doi:10.1016/S0040-1625(99)00114-6.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Swann, A., I. Fung, S. Levis, G. Bonan, and S. Doney, 2010: Changes in Arctic vegetation amplify high-latitude warming through the greenhouse effect. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 1295–1300.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Taylor, K. E., R. J. Stouffer, and G. A. Meehl, 2011: A summary of the CMIP5 experimental design. CMIP5 Rep., 33 pp.

  • Thomson, A. M., and Coauthors, 2010: Climate mitigation and the future of tropical landscapes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 19 633–19 638.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Thomson, A. M., and Coauthors, 2011: RCP4.5: A pathway for stabilization of radiative forcing by 2100. Climatic Change, 109, 77–94.

  • Thornton, P. E., J. F. Lamarque, N. A. Rosenbloom, and N. M. Mahowald, 2007: Influence of carbon-nitrogen cycle coupling on land model response to CO2 fertilization and climate variability. Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 21, 1–15.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • U.S. Congress, 2012: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. H.R. Rep. 2454.

  • U.S. EPA, 2010: Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2) regulatory impact analysis. U.S. EPA Rep., 1109 pp.

  • van der Molen, M. K., B. J. J. M. van den Hurk, and W. Hazeleger, 2011: A dampened land use change climate response towards the tropics. Climate Dyn., 37 (9–10), 2035–2043, doi:10.1007/s00382-011-1018-0.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • van Vuuren, D. P., and Coauthors, 2011: The representative concentration pathways: An overview. Climatic Change, 109, 5–31, doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • von Randow, C., and Coauthors, 2004. Comparative measurements and seasonal variations in energy and carbon exchange over forest and pasture in south west Amazonia. Theor. Appl. Climatol.,78, 5–26, doi:10.1007/s00704-004-0041-z.

  • Watson, R. T.,I. R. Noble, B. Bolin, N. H. Ravindranath, D. J. Verardo, and D. J. Dokken, Eds., 2000: Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry. Cambridge University Press, 375 pp.

  • Wise, M., and Coauthors, 2009: Implications of limiting CO2 concentrations for land use and energy. Science, 324, 1183–1186, doi:10.1126/science.1168475.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 3519 2222 227
PDF Downloads 492 108 5