Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “climate policy”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Potential Impact of a US Climate Policy and Air Quality Regulations on Future Air Quality and Climate Change

We have investigated how future air quality and climate change are influenced by the US air quality regulations that existed or were proposed in 2013 and a hypothetical climate mitigation policy that aims to reduce 2050 CO2 emissions to be 50% below 2005 emissions. Using the NASA GISS ModelE2 general circulation model, we look at the impacts for year 2030 and 2055. The US energy-sector emissions are from the GLIMPSE project (GEOS-Chem LIDORT Integrated with MARKAL (MARKet ALlocation) for the Purpose of Scenario Exploration), and other US emissions data sets and the rest of the world emissions data sets are based on the RCP4.5 scenario. The US air quality regulations are projected to have a strong beneficial impact on US air quality and public health in year 2030 and 2055 but result in positive radiative forcing. Under this scenario, no more emission constraints are added after 2020, and the impacts on air quality and climate change are similar between year 2030 and 2055. Surface particulate matter with a diameter smaller than 2.5 micron PM(sub 2:5) is reduced by 2 approximately μg/m(sup -3) on average over the USA, and surface ozone by approximately 8 ppbv. The improved air quality prevents about 91 400 premature deaths in the USA, mainly due to the PM(sub 2:5) reduction approximately (74 200 lives saved). The air quality regulations reduce the light-reflecting aerosols (i.e., sulfate and organic matter) more than the light-absorbing species (i.e., black carbon and ozone), leading to a strong positive radiative forcing (RF) over the USA by both aerosols' direct and indirect forcing: the total RF is approximately 0.04 W m(sup -2) over the globe, and approximately 0.8 W m(sup -2) over the USA. Under the hypothetical climate policy, a future CO2 emissions cut is achieved in part by relying less on coal, and thus SO2 emissions are noticeably reduced. This provides air quality co-benefits, but it could lead to potential climate disbenefits over the USA. In 2055, the US mean total RF is +C02 W m(sup -2) due to positive aerosol direct and indirect forcing, while the global mean total RF is -0.06 W m(sup -2) due to the dominant negative CO2 RF (instantaneous RF). To achieve a regional-scale climate benefit via a climate policy, it is critical (1) to have multinational efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and (2) to simultaneously target emission reduction of light-absorbing species (e.g., BC and O3) on top of long-lived species. The latter is very desirable as the resulting climate benefit occurs faster and provides cobenefits to air quality and public health.

Air quality↗
NASA NTRS2012

Understanding Climate Policy Data Needs. NASA Carbon Monitoring System Briefing: Characterizing Flux Uncertainty, Washington D.C., 11 January 2012

Climate policy in the United States is currently guided by public-private partnerships and actions at the local and state levels. This mitigation strategy is made up of programs that focus on energy efficiency, renewable energy, agricultural practices and implementation of technologies to reduce greenhouse gases. How will policy makers know if these strategies are working, particularly at the scales at which they are being implemented? The NASA Carbon Monitoring System (CMS) will provide information on carbon dioxide fluxes derived from observations of earth's land, ocean and atmosphere used in state of the art models describing their interactions. This new modeling system could be used to assess the impact of specific policy interventions on CO2 reductions, enabling an iterative, results-oriented policy process. In January of 2012, the CMS team held a meeting with carbon policy and decision makers in Washington DC to describe the developing modeling system to policy makers. The NASA CMS will develop pilot studies to provide information across a range of spatial scales, consider carbon storage in biomass, and improve measures of the atmospheric distribution of carbon dioxide. The pilot involves multiple institutions (four NASA centers as well as several universities) and over 20 scientists in its work. This pilot study will generate CO2 flux maps for two years using observational constraints in NASA's state-of -the-art models. Bottom-up surface flux estimates will be computed using data-constrained land and ocean models; comparison of the different techniques will provide some knowledge of uncertainty in these estimates. Ensembles of atmospheric carbon distributions will be computed using an atmospheric general circulation model (GEOS-5), with perturbations to the surface fluxes and to transport. Top-down flux estimates will be computed from observed atmospheric CO2 distributions (ACOS/GOSAT retrievals) alongside the forward-model fields, in conjunction with an inverse approach based on the CO2 model of GEOS ]Chem. The forward model ensembles will be used to build understanding of relationships among surface flux perturbations, transport uncertainty and atmospheric carbon concentration. This will help construct uncertainty estimates and information on the true spatial resolution of the top-down flux calculations. The relationship between the top-down and bottom-up flux distributions will be documented. Because the goal of NASA CMS is to be policy relevant, the scientists involved in the flux modeling pilot need to understand and be focused on the needs of the climate policy and decision making community. If policy makers are to use CMS products, they must be aware of the modeling effort and begin to design policies that can be evaluated with information. Improving estimates of carbon sequestered in forests, for example, will require information on the spatial variability of forest biomass that is far more explicit than is presently possible using only ground observations. Carbon mitigation policies being implemented by cities around the United States could be designed with the CMS data in mind, enabling sequential evaluation and subsequent improvements in incentives, structures and programs. The success of climate mitigation programs being implemented in the United States today will hang on the depth of the relationship between scientists and their policy and decision making counterparts. Ensuring that there is two-way communication between data providers and users is important for the success both of the policies and the scientific products meant to support them..

Brown, Molly E.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Communicating the Needs of Climate Change Policy Makers to Scientists

This chapter will describe the challenges that earth scientists face in developing science data products relevant to decision maker and policy needs, and will describe strategies that can improve the two-way communication between the scientist and the policy maker. Climate change policy and decision making happens at a variety of scales - from local government implementing solar homes policies to international negotiations through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Scientists can work to provide data at these different scales, but if they are not aware of the needs of decision makers or understand what challenges the policy maker is facing, they are likely to be less successful in influencing policy makers as they wished. This is because the science questions they are addressing may be compelling, but not relevant to the challenges that are at the forefront of policy concerns. In this chapter we examine case studies of science-policy partnerships, and the strategies each partnership uses to engage the scientist at a variety of scales. We examine three case studies: the global Carbon Monitoring System pilot project developed by NASA, a forest biomass mapping effort for Silvacarbon project, and a forest canopy cover project being conducted for forest management in Maryland. In each of these case studies, relationships between scientists and policy makers were critical for ensuring the focus of the science as well as the success of the decision-making.

Brown, Molly E.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Global Carbon Budget 2016

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere the global carbon budget is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe data sets and methodology to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics, and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates and consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, respectively, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on combined evidence from land-cover change data, fire activity associated with deforestation, and models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. The variability in SOCEAN is evaluated with data products based on surveys of ocean CO2 measurements. The global residual terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated by the difference of the other terms of the global carbon budget and compared to results of independent dynamic global vegetation models. We compare the mean land and ocean fluxes and their variability to estimates from three atmospheric inverse methods for three broad latitude bands. All uncertainties are reported as +/- 1(sigma), reflecting the current capacity to characterize the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. For the last decade available (2006-2015), EFF was 9.3+/-0.5 GtC/yr, ELUC 1.0+/-0.5 GtC/yr,GATM 4.5+/-0.1 GtC/yr, SOCEAN 2.6+/-0.5 GtC/yr, and SLAND 3.1+/-0.9 GtC/yr. For year 2015 alone, the growth in EFF was approximately zero and emissions remained at 9.9+/-0.5 GtC/yr, showing a slowdown in growth of these emissions compared to the average growth of 1.8/yr that took place during 2006-2015.Also, for 2015, ELUC was 1.3+/-0.5 GtC/yr, GATM was 6.3+/-0.2 GtC/yr, SOCEAN was 3.0+/-0.5 GtC/yr, and SLAND was 1.9+/-0.9 GtC/yr. GATM was higher in 2015 compared to the past decade (2006-2015), reflecting a smaller SLAND for that year. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 399.4+/-0.1 ppm averaged over 2015. For 2016, preliminary data indicate the continuation of low growth in EFF with +0.2% (range of -1.0 to +1.8% ) based on national emissions projections for China and USA, and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. In spite of the low growth of EFF in 2016, the growth rate in atmospheric CO2 concentration is expected to be relatively high because of the persistence of the smaller residual terrestrial sink (SLAND) in response to El Nino conditions of 2015-2016. From this projection of EFF and assumed constant ELUC for 2016, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach 565+/-55 GtC (2075+/-205 GtCO2) for 1870-2016, about 75% from EFF and 25% from ELUC. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this data set.

Quéré, Corinne Le↗
NASA NTRS2019

Global Carbon Budget 2019

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere – the “global carbon budget” – is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe data sets and methodology to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (E(FF)) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land use change (E(LUC)), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its growth rate (G(ATM)) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (S(OCEAN)) and terrestrial CO2 sink (S(LAND)) are estimated with global process models constrained by observations. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (B(IM)), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the last decade available (2009–2018), E(FF) was 9.5±0.5 GtC/yr, E(LUC) 1.5±0.7 GtC/yr, G(ATM) 4.9±0.02 GtC/yr (2.3±0.01 ppm/yr), S(OCEAN) 2.5±0.6 GtC/yr, and S(LAND) 3.2±0.6 GtC/yr, with a budget imbalance B(IM) of 0.4 GtC/yr indicating overestimated emissions and/or underestimated sinks. For the year 2018 alone, the growth in E(FF) was about 2.1 % and fossil emissions increased to 10.0±0.5 GtC/yr, reaching 10 GtC/yr for the first time in history, E(LUC) was 1.5±0.7 GtC/yr, for total anthropogenic CO2 emissions of 11.5±0.9 GtC/yr (42.5±3.3 GtCO2). Also for 2018, G(ATM) was 5.1±0.2 GtC/yr (2.4±0.1 ppm/yr), S(OCEAN) was 2.6±0.6 GtC/yr, and S(LAND) was 3.5±0.7 GtC/yr, with a B(IM) of 0.3 GtC. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 407.38±0.1 ppm averaged over 2018. For 2019, preliminary data for the first 6–10 months indicate a reduced growth in E(FF) of +0.6 % (range of −0.2 % to 1.5 %) based on national emissions projections for China, the USA, the EU, and India and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy for the rest of the world. Overall, the mean and trend in the five components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2018, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC/yr persist for the representation of semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. A detailed comparison among individual estimates and the introduction of a broad range of observations shows (1) no consensus in the mean and trend in land use change emissions over the last decade, (2) a persistent low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) an apparent underestimation of the CO2 variability by ocean models outside the tropics. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2018a, b, 2016, 2015a, b, 2014, 2013).

global carbon budget 2019↗
NASA NTRS2022

Global Carbon Budget 2022

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize data sets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO 2 emissions (E FOS ) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (E LUC ), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO 2 concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (G ATM ) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO 2 sink (S OCEAN ) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based data products. The terrestrial CO 2 sink (S LAND ) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (B IM ), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2021, E FOS increased by 5.1 % relative to 2020, with fossil emissions at 10.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr −1 (9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr −1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and E LUC was 1.1 ± 0.7 GtC yr −1 , for a total anthropogenic CO 2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 10.9 ± 0.8 GtC yr −1 (40.0 ± 2.9 GtCO 2 ). Also, for 2021, G ATM was 5.2 ± 0.2 GtC yr −1 (2.5 ± 0.1 ppm yr −1 ), S OCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.4 GtC yr −1 , and S LAND was 3.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr −1 , with a B IM of −0.6 GtC yr −1 (i.e. the total estimated sources were too low or sinks were too high). The global atmospheric CO 2 concentration averaged over 2021 reached 414.71 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2022 suggest an increase in E FOS relative to 2021 of +1.0 % (0.1 % to 1.9 %) globally and atmospheric CO 2 concentration reaching 417.2 ppm, more than 50 % above pre-industrial levels (around 278 ppm). Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2021, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr −1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO 2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO 2 flux in the northern extratropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2022 (Friedlingstein et al., 2022b).

Pierre Friedlingstein↗
NASA NTRS2023

Harmonising the Land-Use Flux Estimates of Global Models and National Inventories for 2000–2020

As the focus of climate policy shifts from pledges to implementation, there is a growing need to track progress on climate change mitigation at the country level, particularly for the land-use sector. Despite new tools and models providing unprecedented monitoring opportunities, striking differences remain in estimations of anthropogenic land-use CO 2 fluxes between, on the one hand, the national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs) used to assess compliance with national climate targets under the Paris Agreement and, on the other hand, the Global Carbon Budget and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports, both based on global bookkeeping models (BMs). Recent studies have shown that these differences are mainly due to inconsistent definitions of anthropogenic CO 2 fluxes in managed forests. Countries assume larger areas of forest to be managed than BMs do, due to a broader definition of managed land in NGHGIs. Additionally, the fraction of the land sink caused by indirect effects of human-induced environmental change (e.g. fertilisation effect on vegetation growth due to increased atmospheric CO 2 concentration) on managed lands is treated as non-anthropogenic by BMs but as anthropogenic in most NGHGIs. We implement an approach that adds the CO 2 sink caused by environmental change in countries' managed forests (estimated by 16 dynamic global vegetation models, DGVMs) to the land-use fluxes from three BMs. This sum is conceptually more comparable to NGHGIs and is thus expected to be quantitatively more similar. Our analysis uses updated and more comprehensive data from NGHGIs than previous studies and provides model results at a greater level of disaggregation in terms of regions, countries and land categories (i.e. forest land, deforestation, organic soils, other land uses). Our results confirm a large difference (6.7 GtCO 2 yr −1 ) in global land-use CO 2 fluxes between the ensemble mean of the BMs, which estimate a source of 4.8 GtCO 2 yr −1 for the period 2000–2020, and NGHGIs, which estimate a sink of −1.9 GtCO 2 yr −1 in the same period. Most of the gap is found on forest land (3.5 GtCO 2 yr −1 ), with differences also for deforestation (2.4 GtCO 2 yr −1 ), for fluxes from other land uses (1.0 GtCO 2 yr −1 ) and to a lesser extent for fluxes from organic soils (0.2 GtCO2 yr−1). By adding the DGVM ensemble mean sink arising from environmental change in managed forests (−6.4 GtCO 2 yr −1 ) to BM estimates, the gap between BMs and NGHGIs becomes substantially smaller both globally (residual gap: 0.3 GtCO 2 yr −1 ) and in most regions and countries. However, some discrepancies remain and deserve further investigation. For example, the BMs generally provide higher emissions from deforestation than NGHGIs and, when adjusted with the sink in managed forests estimated by DGVMs, yield a sink that is often greater than NGHGIs. In summary, this study provides a blueprint for harmonising the estimations of anthropogenic land-use fluxes, allowing for detailed comparisons between global models and national inventories at global, regional and country levels. This is crucial to increase confidence in land-use emissions estimates, support investments in land-based mitigation strategies and assess the countries' collective progress under the Global Stocktake of the Paris Agreement.

Giacomo Grassi↗
NASA NTRS2024

Aera-Mip: Emission Pathways, Remaining Budgets, and Carbon Cycle Dynamics Compatible With 1.5 and 2 °C Global Warming Stabilization

While international climate policies now focus on limiting global warming to well below 2 °C or pursuing a 1.5 °C level of global warming, the climate modelling community has not provided an experimental design in which all Earth system models (ESMs) converge and stabilize at the same prescribed global warming levels. This gap hampers accurate estimations based on comprehensive ESMs of the carbon emission pathways and budgets needed to meet such agreed warming levels and of the associated climate impacts under temperature stabilization. Here, we apply the Adaptive Emission Reduction Approach (AERA) with ESMs to provide such simulations in which all models converge at 1.5 and 2.0 °C warming levels by adjusting their emissions over time. These emission-driven simulations provide a wide range of emission pathways and resulting atmospheric CO 2 projections for a given warming level, uncovering uncertainty ranges that were previously missing in the traditional Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) scenarios with prescribed greenhouse gas concentration pathways. Meeting the 1.5 °C warming level requires a 40 % (full model range: 7 % to 76 %) reduction in multi-model mean CO 2 -forcing-equivalent (CO 2 -fe) emissions from 2025 to 2030, a 98 % (57 % to 127 %) reduction from 2025 to 2050, and a stabilization at 1.0 (−1.7 to 2.9) PgC yr−1 from 2100 onward after the 1.5 °C global warming level is reached. Meeting the 2.0 °C warming level requires a 47 % (8 % to 92 %) reduction in multi-model mean CO 2 -fe emissions until 2050 and a stabilization at 1.7 (−1.5 to 2.7) PgC yr−1 from 2100 onward. The on-average positive emissions under stabilized global temperatures are the result of a decreasing transient climate response to cumulative CO 2 -fe emissions over time under stabilized global warming. This evolution is consistent with a slightly negative zero emissions commitment – initially assumed to be zero – and leads to an increase in the post-2025 CO 2 -fe emission budget by a factor of 2.2 (−0.8 to 6.9) by 2150 for the 1.5 °C warming level and a factor of 1.4 (0.9 to 2.4) for the 2.0 °C warming level compared to its first estimate in 2025. The median CO 2 -only carbon budget by 2150, relative to 2020, is 800 GtCO 2 for the 1.5 °C warming level and 2250 GtCO 2 for the 2.0 °C warming level. These median values exceed the median IPCC AR6 estimates by 60 % for the 1.5 °C warming level and 67 % for 2.0 °C. Some of the differences may be explained by the choice of the mitigation scenario for non-CO 2 radiative agents. Our simulations highlight shifts in carbon uptake dynamics under stabilized temperature, such as a cessation of the carbon sinks in the North Atlantic and in tropical forests. On the other hand, the Southern Ocean remains a carbon sink centuries after temperatures stabilize. Overall, this new type of warming-level-based emission-driven simulation offers a more coherent assessment across climate models and opens up a wide range of possibilities for studying both the carbon cycle and climate impacts, such as extreme events, under climate stabilization.

Adaptive Emission Reduction Approach↗
NASA NTRS2021

Intergenerational Inequities in Exposure to Climate Extremes: Young Generations Are Severely Threatened By Climate Change

Under continued global warming, extreme events such as heat waves will continue to rise in frequency, intensity, duration, and spatial extent over the next decades. Younger generations are therefore expected to face more such events across their lifetimes compared with older generations. This raises important issues of solidarity and fairness across generations that have fueled a surge of climate protests led by young people in recent years and that underpin issues of intergenerational equity raised in recent climate litigation. However, the standard scientific paradigm is to assess climate change in discrete time windows or at discrete levels of warming, a “period” approach that inhibits quantification of how much more extreme events a particular generation will experience over its lifetime compared with another. By developing a “cohort” perspective to quantify changes in lifetime exposure to climate extremes and compare across generations (see the first figure), we estimate that children born in 2020 will experience a two- to sevenfold increase in extreme events, particularly heat waves, compared with people born in 1960, under current climate policy pledges. Our results highlight a severe threat to the safety of young generations and call for drastic emission reductions to safeguard their future. Meteorological extremes, hazards, or climate change impacts are mostly studied as they evolve over time under varying emission scenarios and socioeconomic pathways. For example, applying a heat wave indicator (see table S1) to four bias-adjusted global climate models indicates that the land area annually affected by such heat waves will increase from ~15% around 2020 to ~22% by 2100 under a scenario compatible with limiting global warming to 1.5°C, and to ~46% under a scenario in line with current emission reduction pledges (see the first figure). Recent studies extended this approach, studying aspects of climate change as a function of global mean temperature (GMT) increments, highlighting the scenario-independence of several extreme event indicators but remaining, in essence, a comparison of time windows. By contrast, we performed a birth cohort analysis by combining a collection of multimodel extreme event projections with country-scale life expectancy information, gridded population data, and future global temperature trajectories from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (see supplementary materials). By integrating the exposure of an average person in a country or region to extreme events across their lifetime, we encapsulate spatiotemporal changes in climate hazards, population density, cohort size, and life expectancy (see the first figure).

global warming↗
NASA NTRS2000

The Dynamics of a Semi-Arid Region in Response to Climate and Water - Use Policy

The objectives of this project were to determine the response of semi-arid ecosystems to the combined forcings of climate variability and anthropogenic stress. Arid and semi-arid systems encompass close to 40% of the worlds land surface. The ecology of these regions are principally limited by water, and as the water resources wax and wane, so should the health and vigor of the ecosystems. Water, however, is a necessary and critical resource for humans living in these same regions. Thus for many and and semi-arid regions the natural systems and human systems are in direct competition for a limited resource. Increasing competition through development of and and semi-arid regions, export of water resources, as well as potential persistent changes in weather patterns are likely to lead to fundamental changes in carrying capacity, resilience, and ecology of these regions. A detailed understanding of these systems respond to forcing on a regional and local scale is required in order to better prepare for and manage future changes in the availability of water. In the Owens Valley CA, decadal changes in rainfall and increased use of groundwater resources by Los Angles (which derives 60-70% of its water from this region) have resulted in a large-scale experiment on the impacts of these changes in semi-arid ecosystems. This project works directly with the Inyo County Water Department (local water authority) and the Los Angles Department of Water and Power (regional demand on water resources) to understand changes, their causes, and impacts. Very detailed records have been kept for a number of selected sites in the valley which provide essential ground truth. These results are then scaled up through remote sensed data to regions scale to assess large scale patterns and link them to the fundamental decisions regarding the water resources of this region. A fundamental goal is to understand how resilient the native ecosystems are to large changes in water resources. Are they are on a spring (remove and return resources, do the systems return to the original state) or a vector (when water returns have the systems fundamentally changed).

Mustard, John F.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Climate and air quality impacts due to mitigation of non-methane near-term climate forcers

It is important to understand how future environmental policies will impact both climate change and air pollution. Although targeting near-term climate forcers (NTCFs), defined here as aerosols, tropospheric ozone, and precursor gases, should improve air quality, NTCF reductions will also impact climate. Prior assessments of the impact of NTCF mitigation on air quality and climate have been limited. This is related to the idealized nature of some prior studies, simplified treatment of aerosols and chemically reactive gases, as well as a lack of a sufficiently large number of models to quantify model diversity and robust responses. Here, we quantify the 2015–2055 climate and air quality effects of non-methane NTCFs using nine state-of-the-art chemistry–climate model simulations conducted for the Aerosol and Chemistry Model Intercomparison Project (AerChemMIP). Simulations are driven by two future scenarios featuring similar increases in greenhouse gases (GHGs) but with “weak” (SSP3-7.0) versus “strong” (SSP3-7.0-lowNTCF) levels of air quality control measures. As SSP3-7.0 lacks climate policy and has the highest levels of NTCFs, our results (e.g., surface warming) represent an upper bound. Unsurprisingly, we find significant improvements in air quality under NTCF mitigation (strong versus weak air quality controls). Surface fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone (O3) decrease by −2.2±0.32 µg m−3 and −4.6±0.88 ppb, respectively (changes quoted here are for the entire 2015–2055 time period; uncertainty represents the 95 % confidence interval), over global land surfaces, with larger reductions in some regions including south and southeast Asia. Non-methane NTCF mitigation, however, leads to additional climate change due to the removal of aerosol which causes a net warming effect, including global mean surface temperature and precipitation increases of 0.25±0.12 K and 0.03±0.012 mm d−1, respectively. Similarly, increases in extreme weather indices, including the hottest and wettest days, also occur. Regionally, the largest warming and wetting occurs over Asia, including central and north Asia (0.66±0.20 K and 0.03±0.02 mm d−1), south Asia (0.47±0.16 K and 0.17±0.09 mm d−1), and east Asia (0.46±0.20 K and 0.15±0.06 mm d−1). Relatively large warming and wetting of the Arctic also occur at 0.59±0.36 K and 0.04±0.02 mm d−1, respectively. Similar surface warming occurs in model simulations with aerosol-only mitigation, implying weak cooling due to ozone reductions. Our findings suggest that future policies that aggressively target non-methane NTCF reductions will improve air quality but will lead to additional surface warming, particularly in Asia and the Arctic. Policies that address other NTCFs including methane, as well as carbon dioxide emissions, must also be adopted to meet climate mitigation goals.

Climate↗
NASA NTRS2015

New York City Panel on Climate Change 2015 Report Introduction

The climate of the New York City metropolitan region is changing annual temperatures are hotter, heavy downpours are increasingly frequent, and the sea is rising. These trends, which are also occurring in many parts of the world, are projected to continue and even worsen in the coming decades because of higher concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by burning of fossil fuels and clearing of forests for agriculture. These changing climate hazards increase the risks for the people, economy, and infrastructure of New York City. As was demonstrated by Hurricane Sandy, coastal and low-lying areas, the elderly and very young, and lower-income neighborhoods are highly vulnerable. In response to these climate challenges, New York City is developing a broad range of climate resiliency policies and programs, as well as the knowledge base to support them. The knowledge base includes up-to-date climate, sea level rise, and coastal flooding projections; a Climate Resiliency Indicators and Monitoring System; and resiliency studies. A special attribute of the New York City response to these challenges is the recognition that both the knowledge base and the programs and policies it supports need to evolve through time as climate risks unfold in the coming decades. In early September 2012, just weeks before Hurricane Sandy hit, the New York City Council passed Local Law 42 that established the New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC) as an ongoing body serving the City of New York. The NPCC is required to meet at least twice each calendar year to review recent scientific data on climate change and its potential impacts, and to make recommendations on climate projections for the coming decades to the end of the century. These projections are due within one year of the publication of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Assessment Reports (http:www.ipcc.ch), or at least every three years. The NPCC also advises the Mayor's Office of Sustainability and the Mayor's Office of Recovery and Resiliency (ORR) on the development of a community- or borough-level communications strategy intended to ensure that the public is informed about the findings of the panel, including the creation of a summary of the climate change projections for dissemination to city residents.

hurricanes↗
NASA NTRS2021

Observations of Greenhouse Gases as Climate Indicators

Humans have significantly altered the energy balance of the Earth’s climate system mainly not only by extracting and burning fossil fuels but also by altering the biosphere and using halocarbons. The 3rd US National Climate Assessment pointed to a need for a system of indicators of climate and global change based on long-term data that could be used to support assessments and this led to the development of the National Climate Indicators System (NCIS). Here we identify a representative set of key atmospheric indicators of changes in atmospheric radiative forcing due to greenhouse gases (GHGs), and we evaluate atmospheric composition measurements, including non-CO2GHGs for use as climate change indicators in support of the US National Climate Assessment. GHG abundances and their changes over time can provide valuable information on the success of climate mitigation policies, as well as insights into possible carbon-climate feedback processes that may ultimately affect the success of those policies. To ensure that reliable information for assessing GHG emission changes can be provided on policy-relevant scales, expanded observational efforts are needed. Furthermore, the ability to detect trends resulting from changing emissions requires a commitment to supporting long-term observations. Long-term measurements of greenhouse gases, aerosols, and clouds and related climate indicators used with a dimming/brightening index could provide a foundation for quantifying forcing and its attribution and reducing error in existing indicators that do not account for complicated cloud processes.

greenhouse gases↗
NASA NTRS2016

Climate and Health Impacts of US Emissions Reductions Consistent with 2 C

An emissions trajectory for the US consistent with 2 C warming would require marked societal changes, making it crucial to understand the associated benefits. Previous studies have examined technological potentials and implementation costs and public health benefits have been quantified for less-aggressive potential emissions-reduction policies, but researchers have not yet fully explored the multiple benefits of reductions consistent with 2 C. We examine the impacts of such highly ambitious scenarios for clean energy and vehicles. US transportation emissions reductions avoid approx.0.03 C global warming in 2030 (0.15 C in 2100), whereas energy emissions reductions avoid approx.0.05-0.07 C 2030 warming (approx.0.25 C in 2100). Nationally, however, clean energy policies produce climate disbenefits including warmer summers (although these would be eliminated by the remote effects of similar policies if they were undertaken elsewhere). The policies also greatly reduce damaging ambient particulate matter and ozone. By 2030, clean energy policies could prevent approx.175,000 premature deaths, with approx.22,000 (11,000-96,000; 95% confidence) fewer annually thereafter, whereas clean transportation could prevent approx.120,000 premature deaths and approx.14,000 (9,000-52,000) annually thereafter. Near-term national benefits are valued at approx.US$250 billion (140 billion to 1,050billion) per year, which is likely to exceed implementation costs. Including longer-term, worldwide climate impacts, benefits roughly quintuple, becoming approx.5-10 times larger than estimated implementation costs. Achieving the benefits, however, would require both larger and broader emissions reductions than those in current legislation or regulations.

policies↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Benefits of Incorporating Shipping Containers into the Climate Change Adaption Plans at NASA Wallops Flight Facility

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has several centers and facilities located near the coast that are undoubtedly susceptible to climate change. One of those facilities is Wallops Flight Facility on the Eastern Shore of Virginia which is separated into three areas: Main Base, Mainland, and the Island. Wallops Island has numerous buildings and assets that are vulnerable to flood inundation, intense storms, and storm surge. The shoreline of Wallops Island is prone to beach erosion and is slated for another beach replenishment project in 2019. In addition, current climate projections for NASAs centers and facilities, conducted by the Climate Adaptation Science Investigators, warn of inevitable increases in annual temperature, precipitation, sea level rise, and extreme events such as heat waves. The aforementioned vulnerabilities Wallops Island faces in addition to the projections of future climate change reveal an urgency for NASA to adjust how new buildings at its centers and facilities near the coast are built to adapt to the inevitable effects of climate change. Although the agency has made strides to mitigate the effects of climate change by incorporating L.E.E.D. into new buildings that produce less greenhouse gas, the strides for the agency to institute clear climate adaptation policies for the buildings at its centers and facilities near the coast seem to lag behind. As NASA continues to formulate formidable climate change adaptation plans for its centers and facilities, an architectural trend that should be examined for its potential to replace several old buildings at Wallops Island is shipping containers buildings. Shipping containers or Intermodal Steel Building Units offer an array of benefits such as strength, durability, versatility, modular, and since they can be upcycled, they are also eco-friendly. Some disadvantages of shipping containers are they contain harmful chemicals, insulation must be added, fossil fuels must be used to transport them to the site, and multiple ISBUs are needed. However, the benefits of shipping container buildings could be utilized at NASA centers or facilities near the coast such as Wallops Island on new buildings that are designed to adapt to the impending effects of climate change. Thus, this Masters Research Project will explore how those benefits can be incorporated into the climate change adaptation plans at Wallops Island and make recommendations for policy guidelines and shipping container buildings specific to Wallops Island.

Sustainable Design↗
NASA NTRS2012

Using Remotely Sensed Data and Hydrologic Models to Evaluate the Effects of Climate Change on Shallow Aquatic Ecosystems in the Mobile Bay, AL Estuary

Coastal systems in the northern Gulf of Mexico, including the Mobile Bay, AL estuary, are subject to increasing pressure from a variety of activities including climate change. Climate changes have a direct effect on the discharge of rivers that drain into Mobile Bay and adjacent coastal water bodies. The outflows change water quality (temperature, salinity, and sediment concentrations) in the shallow aquatic areas and affect ecosystem functioning. Mobile Bay is a vital ecosystem that provides habitat for many species of fauna and flora. Historically, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) and seagrasses were found in this area of the northern Gulf of Mexico; however the extent of vegetation has significantly decreased over the last 60 years. The objectives of this research are to determine: how climate changes affect runoff and water quality in the estuary and how these changes will affect habitat suitability for SAV and seagrasses. Our approach is to use watershed and hydrodynamic modeling to evaluate the impact of climate change on shallow water aquatic ecosystems in Mobile Bay and adjacent coastal areas. Remotely sensed Landsat data were used for current land cover land use (LCLU) model input and the data provided by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the future changes in temperature, precipitation, and sea level rise were used to create the climate scenarios for the 2025 and 2050 model simulations. Project results are being shared with Gulf coast stakeholders through the Gulf of Mexico Data Atlas to benefit coastal policy and climate change adaptation strategies.

Estes, M. G.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Integrated assessment of climate change impacts on crop productivity and income of commercial maize farms in northeast South Africa

Agriculture in South Africa sustains about 70% of the region’s population for food, income and employment, playing an important role for food security and the local economy. The focus of the study was the commercial maize farms of the Free State Province given their importance in the National economy. The Regional Integrated Assessment (phase I) was implemented to assess climate change and adaptation that links climate, crops, economic data and tools developed by the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP). In this context, the“system”is defined as a whole of agronomic and socio-economic factors. Within that framework three core questions were being evaluated: (i) Impacts of climate change under current system; (ii) Impacts of climate change under future system; (iii) The role of adaptation under climate change and the future system. Maize production will decrease between 10% to 16% as a result of projected climate impacts. Also, current agricultural production systems are negatively affected by climate change with an increase in poverty rates between 2% to 3%. The projected adoption of the adapted technology would result in positive increased net returns and a decrease in poverty rate of between 12%and 22%. The results of this study show that implementing adaptation measures and other strategies as indicated by the local stakeholders will have positive impacts on the agricultural production systems and can contribute to support and inform climate change policy decision making such as the development of National Adaptation Plans.

Integrated assessment↗