Researchers develop tool to assess regional risks of climate change, potential impacts on infrastructure and planning

Nov 07, 2012 by Victoria Ekstrom
Aerial views of the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy to the New Jersey coast taken during a search and rescue mission by 1-150 Assault Helicopter Battalion. Credit: U.S. Air Force/Master Sgt. Mark C. Olsen

Climate scientists cannot attribute any single weather event—whether a drought, wildfire or extreme storm—to climate change. But extreme events, such as Hurricane Sandy, are glimpses of the types of occurrences the world could be more vulnerable to in the future. As the devastation left by Sandy continues to reverberate, decision-makers at every level are asking: How can we be better prepared?

MIT researchers have developed a new tool to help policymakers, and others see the possible local effects of . Its regional projections of —such as long-term temperature and precipitation changes—allow local planners to evaluate risks, and how these risks could shape crops, roads and .

"As we see more like Sandy, the importance of assessing regional impacts grows," says lead researcher Adam Schlosser, assistant director for science research at MIT's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change. "Our approach helps decision- and policymakers balance the risks … so they can better prepare their communities for future impacts climate change might bring."

For example, Schlosser says, if a community is planning to build a bridge, it should look at—and plan for—the expected magnitude of flooding in 2050.

"In areas devastated by Sandy, the rebuilding of lost property and infrastructure will come at considerable cost and effort," Schlosser says. "But should we rebuild to better prepare for future storms like these? Or should we prepare for stronger and/or more frequent storms? There remains considerable uncertainty in these projections and that implies risk. Our technique has been developed with these questions in mind."

Schlosser's research partner, Ken Strzepek, a research scientist at the Joint Program on the Science and Policy of , notes policymakers are now often given little more than a set of extreme circumstances to consider.

"Policymakers don't like extremes or worst-case scenarios," Strzepek says, "because they can't afford to plan for the worst-case scenarios. They like to see what is the likelihood of different outcomes. That's what we're giving them."

Getting results

In this new method, the researchers quantify the likelihood of particular outcomes and add socioeconomic data, different emission levels and varying degrees of uncertainty. Their technique combines climate-model projections and analysis from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the MIT Integrated Global System Modeling framework. The MIT framework is itself a combined computer model that integrates an economic, human system with a natural, earth system.

"This approach allows us to widen the scope and flexibility of climate analysis," Schlosser says. "It provides us with efficient capabilities to determine climate-change risks."

The initial study using this approach—accepted by the Journal of Climate and available on the journal's website—compares a business-as-usual case with a scenario that reduces emissions. The researchers find that lowering emissions reduces the odds of regional warming and precipitation changes. In fact, for many places, the likelihood of the most extreme warming from the business-as-usual case could be eliminated almost entirely.

The study finds diverse climate-change outcomes: southern and western Africa, the Himalayan region, and the area around Hudson Bay in Canada are expected to warm the most; southern Africa and western Europe see the greatest chance of drier conditions. Meanwhile, the Amazon and northern Siberia may become wetter.

Putting the method to work

Schlosser and Strzepek are pursuing partnerships with communities to put their method to work. But while it's important for every community to begin building climate adaptation into their infrastructure plans, could reap the greatest benefits.

Malcolm Smart, senior economic adviser for the U.K. Department for International Development, who was not involved in this research, says, "This is not only an innovative and multidisciplinary approach to the problem of deep uncertainty, but also a potentially very valuable tool to help vulnerable developing countries cut the cost of damages from climate change."

Strzepek explains why: In the United States, infrastructure plans are designed based on a high standard of risk, while in developing countries projects are typically built to a lower standard of risk. "But if we find that [a developing country] will see greater flooding, and if we're fairly certain of this, then they would save money in the long run if they built roads to withstand those flooding events," Strzepek says.

Schlosser and Strzepek traveled to Finland earlier this fall to present their research at a United Nations University-World Institute for Development Economics Research conference. They've partnered with this organization to inform developing countries of this new tool for assessing climate change.

"Our approach allows decision-makers to cut down on the level of risk they're taking when allocating their limited funds to development projects," Schlosser says. "This can help them see where there are economic benefits to taking a risk-averse approach today, before the damage is done."

Explore further: Atmospheric mercury review raises concerns of environmental impact

More information: globalchange.mit.edu/research/publications/2362

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Building a framework, brick by brick

May 02, 2012

If you want to build a better house, first ask what your buyer needs. Researchers at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory built a modeling structure for policy-making decisions addressing climate change. ...

Climate: which nations, cities most at risk?

Oct 26, 2011

A third of humanity, mostly in Africa and South Asia, face the biggest risks from climate change but rich nations in northern Europe will be least exposed, according to a report released Wednesday.

How to limit risk of climate catastrophe

Oct 02, 2009

(PhysOrg.com) -- A new analysis of climate risk, published by researchers at MIT and elsewhere, shows that even moderate carbon-reduction policies now can substantially lower the risk of future climate change. ...

Alternative futures of a warming world

Feb 10, 2010

An international team of climate scientists will take a new approach to modeling the Earth's climate future, according to a paper in 11 February Nature. The next set of models will include, for the first time, tightly linked ...

Tool is new weapon in fight against climate change

Feb 02, 2012

A new service, developed by experts at The University of Manchester and The Mersey Forest, will provide vital information to help urban neighborhoods avoid the potentially dangerous effects of climate change.

Recommended for you

Shell files new plan to drill in Arctic

34 minutes ago

Royal Dutch Shell has submitted a new plan for drilling in the Arctic offshore Alaska, more than one year after halting its program following several embarrassing mishaps.

Reducing water scarcity possible by 2050

1 hour ago

Water scarcity is not a problem just for the developing world. In California, legislators are currently proposing a $7.5 billion emergency water plan to their voters; and U.S. federal officials last year ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

mememine69
1.8 / 5 (5) Nov 07, 2012
The science says we "could" be at the point of no return from unstoppable warming yet there isn't one IPCC warning that isn't peppered with maybes. Help my house could be on fire maybe?
*In all of the debates Obama hadn't planned to mention climate change once.
*Obama has not mentioned the crisis in the last two State of the Unions addresses.
*Occupywallstreet does not even mention CO2 in its list of demands because of the bank-funded carbon trading stock markets run by corporations.
*Julian Assange is of course a climate change denier.
*Canada killed Y2Kyoto with a freely elected climate change denying prime minister and nobody cared, especially the millions of scientists warning us of unstoppable warming (a comet hit).
Meanwhile, the entire world of SCIENCE, lazy copy and paste news editors and obedient journalists, had condemned our kids to the greenhouse gas ovens of an exaggerated "crisis" and had allowed bank-funded and corporate-run "CARBON TRADING STOCK MARKETS",