Why simple climate change models fail

🌍 Reality vs. Climate Models 🌍 Climate models are falling behind reality. New research reveals that real-world data shows more extreme and unexpected climate changes than models predict. Why? Most models can’t simulate the small-scale processes that run Earth’s climate systems, like: 🌪️ Jet streams ☁️ Cloud formation 🌡️ Soil moisture interactions 🌊 Ocean currents These tiny, daily processes combine in complex ways that models can’t fully capture. This means: • Extreme events (like heat, storms, and marine heatwaves) are happening faster and more intensely than models predict. • The interconnected systems of land, atmosphere, and oceans are reacting in non-linear and amplifying ways we didn’t expect. 🚨 A key finding: Climate models underestimate extreme trends by up to 4x in some areas. 👉 What this means. 1️⃣ Our understanding of the climate crisis must evolve—models need to account for these overlooked processes. 2️⃣ Rapid emissions cuts are essential to avoid more surprises from an accelerating climate system. The gap between models and reality is growing. The science is clear: the climate is changing faster than we are prepared for. 📖 Study: “Global emergence of regional heatwave hotspots outpaces climate model simulations” Link to research: https://lnkd.in/dABZVEry

The challenges of climate change modeling: "The Earth is an unfathomably complex place, a nesting doll of systems within systems. Feedback loops among temperature, land, air, and water are made even more complicated by the fact that every place on Earth is a little different. Natural variability and human-driven warming further alter the rules that govern each of those fundamental interactions. On every continent except Antarctica, certain regions showed up as mysterious hot spots, suffering repeated heat waves worse than what any model could predict or explain. Across places where a third of humanity lives, actual daily temperature records are outpacing model predictions. And a global jump in temperature that lasted from mid-2023 to this past June remains largely unexplained. Per one researcher: “We have to approximate cloud formation because we don’t have the small scales necessary to resolve individual water droplets coming together." "Similarly, models approximate topography, because the scale at which mountain ranges undulate is smaller than the resolution of global climate models, which tend to represent Earth in, at best, 100-square-kilometer pixels. That resolution is good for understanding phenomena such as Arctic warming over decades. But “you can’t resolve a tornado worth anything.” "Models simply can’t function on the scale at which people live, because assessing the impact of current emissions on the future world requires hundreds of years of simulations. Some variables are missing from climate models entirely. Trees and land have been considered major sinks for carbon emissions. But it is changing: Trees and land absorbed much less carbon than normal in 2023. In Finland, forests have stopped absorbing the majority of the carbon they once did, and recently became a net source of emissions, which swamped all gains the country has made in cutting emissions from all other sectors since the early 1990s. The interactions of the ice sheets with the oceans are also largely missing from models. Changing ocean-temperature patterns are currently making climate modelers at NOAA rethink their models of El Niño and La Niña; the agency initially predicted that La Niña’s cooling powers would kick in much sooner than it now appears they will. "The models may be underestimating future climate risks across several regions because of a yet-unclear limitation. And underestimating risk is far more dangerous than overestimating it. Excerpts from The Atlantic article: Climate Models Can’t Explain What’s Happening to Earth Global warming is moving faster than the best models can keep a handle on. By Zoë Schlanger

“Fifty years into the project of modeling Earth’s future climate, we still don’t really know what’s coming. Some places are warming with more ferocity than expected. Extreme events are taking scientists by surprise. Right now, as the bald reality of climate change bears down on human life, scientists are seeing more clearly the limits of our ability to predict the exact future we face. The coming decades may be far worse, and far weirder, than the best models anticipated… This is a problem. The world has warmed enough that city planners, public-health officials, insurance companies, farmers, and everyone else in the global economy want to know what’s coming next for their patch of the planet… Today’s climate models very accurately describe the broad strokes of Earth’s future. But warming has also now progressed enough that scientists are noticing unsettling mismatches between some of their predictions and real outcomes… Across places where a third of humanity lives, actual daily temperature records are outpacing model predictions… And a global jump in temperature that lasted from mid-2023 to this past June remains largely unexplained… Trees and land are major sinks for carbon emissions, and that this fact might change is not accounted for in climate models. But it is changing: Trees and land absorbed much less carbon than normal in 2023, according to research published last October… The interactions of the ice sheets with the oceans are also largely missing from models, Schmidt told me, despite the fact that melting ice could change ocean temperatures, which could have significant knock-on effects… The models may be underestimating future climate risks across several regions because of a yet-unclear limitation. And, Rohde said, underestimating risk is far more dangerous than overestimating it.” #ClimateRisk #TransitionRisk https://lnkd.in/eiSRvUeF

New research published in Science suggests something disturbing: our climate models underestimate the sensitivity of the global temperature to increased greenhouse gas emissions. (Links to a story about the article and the article itself in comments.) The technical details are way above my pay grade, but the basic idea is simple: - Use satellites to measure Earth's energy imbalance (absorbed radiation versus emitted radiation back into the space) - Compare this empirical satellite measure to what 37 different climate models generate It turns out that climate models with high climate sensitivity get much closer to the empirical measurement of energy imbalance. In contrast, climate models with low climate sensitivity underestimate the energy imbalance systematically and by a wide margin. This suggests that climate models with high climate sensitivity could be better constructs for how humanity's greenhouse gas emissions are changing the planet. This is not good news. If climate sensitivity is higher than estimated, that means our current emissions trajectory will produce even more warming than previously thought. And the previous numbers have recently been bad, around 3 degrees Celsius.

There are indications that the climate models missed to account for and integrate the hydrologic cycles, for example the relationship between soil and water. Focusing solely on carbon may result in the misallocation of single bullet resources with potentially catastrophic impacts. Soil and Water: The health of the soil, particularly its microbiome, is a cornerstone of the hydrologic cycle. Healthy soils have a better capacity to absorb and retain water, regulating both drought and flood conditions. Depleted soils, often a result of industrial agricultural practices, can disrupt water cycles, leading to worsened droughts or floods. Potential Misallocation of Resources: When we fixate solely on carbon as the primary culprit in climate change, we may overlook other vital aspects of the ecosystem, like the hydrologic cycle. Such an oversight can lead to misguided solutions, potentially exacerbating problems rather than ameliorating them. There is a profound need for integrating holistic approaches in our climate strategies. Addressing the shortcomings of current models isn't just a scientific necessity but a moral imperative for the well-being of all life on Earth. https://lnkd.in/g7tCuBQi.