Large cli­mate un­cer­tainty even with a 1.5-de­gree tem­per­a­ture in­crease

June 7, 2018 by Pe­ter Rüegg, ETH Zurich
Researchers around the world are observing the increased melting of glaciers as a result of climate change. Credit: Wikipedia Commons

The Paris climate agreement includes the aim of limiting average global warming to 1.5°C. There has previously been little research on how climate might look across the world and over time with this level of temperature increase. Climate scientists have now shown that even this lower level of warming could lead to very different consequences on a regional level.

Since the Paris Agreement in 2015, two numbers have been floating around: 2 and 1.5. At the conference, the nations agreed that average global should be limited to well below 2°C, and that efforts should be pursued to limit it to 1.5°C.

This may look at first glance like pedantic haggling over a few unimportant tenths of a degree, but it could be of paramount importance for the and humanity. This has been shown by a study conducted by an international research group and recently published in the journal Nature. It appeared in connection with a special report from the IPCC about 1.5°C global warming, scheduled to be published this autumn. One of the lead authors of the special report is ETH professor Sonia Seneviratne. "A lot has been researched and written about the 2°C goal, but not about the 1.5°C goal," she says.

Avoiding extreme deviations

In their new study, the climate scientists show that limiting to 1.5°C would avoid risks of extreme deviations from today's climate that could appear if it increased to 2°C. Such extreme deviations include, for example, a nine-degree on the coldest nights in the Arctic or a five-degree increase on the hottest days in the US and other mid-latitude continents. The risk of the Mediterranean area becoming significantly dryer would also be avoidable. However, even an increase of 1.5°C would involve substantial climate risks, emphasises Seneviratne.

The scientists also highlight that the way we reach the 1.5°C goal is decisive for how our climate develops. "Above all, we have to keep in mind the temporal dimension in which the climate heats up," says Seneviratne. If the climate heats up by 1.5°C by 2100, but experiences warming of 2°C or higher prior to this, the consequences will be more serious than if the 1.5°C increase is never exceeded. This could cause irreversible damage, particularly to sensitive ecosystems. "The extinction of species during a phase of excess temperatures couldn't be undone, even if the level of warming was then reduced and limited to a 1.5°C increase."

Seneviratne adds that the general public is likely unaware that all previously published 1.5°C scenarios include a temporary overshoot of the temperature increase and the use of CO2-reducing measures. These measures include reforestation, but also carbon capture and storage (CCS), the capture of CO2 from emission sources or from the atmosphere. This is often accompanied by the use of bioenergy, which replaces fossil fuels.

Dramatic cut in CO2 emissions

However, these options to mitigate could be risky, because CCS is not yet well established and the production of bioenergy requires large areas of land, which could cause competition with food production. "Such problems could be better avoided by drastically and quickly reducing CO2 emissions," says Seneviratne. This could also be achieved with increased energy efficiency, lower energy use, additional use of renewable energies and a global reduction in meat consumption.

There are various estimates of how much CO2 can be emitted without missing the 1.5°C goal; none of them offers much leeway. "It's clear that we must urgently reduce emissions if we want to stand a chance of meeting the 1.5°C goal and keeping any temperature overshoot as low as possible," emphasises Seneviratne. It is therefore necessary to quickly research and implement solutions to combat climate change, she says, even if only in test projects and on small scale: "As an innovative country, Switzerland can contribute significantly to this effort."

Explore further: How 2 degrees rise means even higher temperatures where we live

More information: Sonia I. Seneviratne et al. The many possible climates from the Paris Agreement's aim of 1.5 °C warming, Nature (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0181-4

Related Stories

US, Mediterranean face extreme warming: study

January 21, 2016

Once the world as a whole has warmed by two degrees Celsius, top temperatures in the United States and Mediterranean basin will have climbed by even more, according to a study released Wednesday.

Recommended for you

Sculpting stable structures in pure liquids

February 21, 2019

Oscillating flow and light pulses can be used to create reconfigurable architecture in liquid crystals. Materials scientists can carefully engineer concerted microfluidic flows and localized optothermal fields to achieve ...

Researchers make coldest quantum gas of molecules

February 21, 2019

JILA researchers have made a long-lived, record-cold gas of molecules that follow the wave patterns of quantum mechanics instead of the strictly particle nature of ordinary classical physics. The creation of this gas boosts ...

LMC S154 is a symbiotic recurrent nova, study suggests

February 21, 2019

Astronomers have conducted observations of a symbiotic star in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), known as LMC S154, which provide new insights about the nature of this object. Results of these observations, presented in a ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

2.8 / 5 (4) Jun 07, 2018
There is even more uncertainty in the current explanations for ice age modulation. Interglacial periodicity has something to do with orbital cycles, but why would the climate ignore so many cycles, and react on the fourth or fifth?

The answer lies in dust and albedo.
Please see 'Modulation of Ice Ages via Dust and Albedo:

And this paper has a bearing on current climate science, as it indicates that the primary feedback agent involved in terrestrial climate is albedo, not CO2.

2.6 / 5 (5) Jun 07, 2018
Scare mongering. We know that a 2ºc increase in temperature is not harmful to the environment, as that is the temperature experienced during the Holocene Maximum, just 9,000 years ago. And during the Hol Max, the Taiga forests of Siberia ranged 200 km further north, and the Sahara desert was a lush prairie. So what is wrong with having higher temperatures?

In addition, since CO2 is a primary plant food, vegetation will grow much faster and stronger in a high CO2 environment. Which is why CO2 is boosted in greenhouses. And this is doubly true for arid environments, as present in many third world regions, because the extra CO2 allows the stomata to close, reducing transpiration and water-loss.


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.