2. The Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning is a collaborative network of the University of Alaska, state, federal, and local agencies, NGOs, and industry partners. Its mission is to provide timely access to scenarios of future conditions in Alaska and the Arctic for more effective planning by decision- makers, communities, and industry.

3. There is now clear scientific evidence that our planet is warming How this will affect climate systems around the globe is an enormously complex question Uncertainty and variability are inevitable Climate change presents significant risks to natural and cultural resources Understanding how to address uncertainty is an important part of climate change planning

4. Measuring and modeling change  Global Circulation Models (GCMs)  Complex coupled models created by national and international labs  Interactions of oceans, atmosphere, and radiation balance Calculated which 5 of 15 models were most accurate in the far north A1B, B1 and A2 emissions scenarios Temperature and precipitation projections by month to 2100  Historical data  Weather station data  Interpolated and gridded  CRU data 1901-2008

5. GCM output (ECHAM5) 2.5 x 2.5 degrees  Baseline values = PRISM mean monthly precipitation and temperature, 800m, 1971-2000  Adjusted and interpolated GCM outputs to historical baseline  Effectively removed model biases while scaling down the GCM projections Frankenberg et al., Science, Sept. 11, 2009

6.  Inputs to GCMs  Solar radiation is essentially a known quantity  Levels of greenhouse gases are uncertain, but accounted for by varying emissions scenarios  GCM algorithms  Oceanic and atmospheric circulation are hard to predict and model  May include thresholds (tipping points) such as ocean currents shifting  Don’t fully account for short-term phenomena such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) The PDO causes significant climate shifts on a decadal scale

7. 1. Projections of future conditions that are linked to present and past conditions 2. Detailed explanations of the rules, models, and assumptions underlying the projections 3. Objective interpretations of scenarios based on these projections www.snap.uaf.edu

8. Torre Jorgensen (Geophysical Institute Permafrost Lab, UAF) Torre Jorgenson Soil temperature at 1-meter depth: 1980s, 2040s, and 2080s

9. Simulated Empirical.

10.  Change is happening, and will continue for decades regardless of mitigation efforts.  Key tipping points may be crossed, e.g fire, permafrost, sea ice, biome shift, glacial loss.  High uncertainty results in divergent possible futures for many important variables. www.nenananewslink.com alaskarenewableenergy.org

11. Forecast Planning One Future Scenario Planning Multiple Futures What we know today +10% -10% Uncertainties Global Business Network (GBN) -- A member of the Monitor Group Copyright 2010 Monitor Company Group What we know today

12. Everyday choices are based on scenarios Examining scenarios  What are possible outcomes?  What is the likelihood of each outcome?  How much do we want to avoid the bad outcomes?  How desirable are the good outcomes?  How do we balance time and costs against risks? http://mareeconway.co m/blog Hedge Your Bets Core Robust Satellite Bet the Farm Hedge Your Bets Core Robust Satellite Bet the Farm

13.  Collaboration rather than top-down information transfer  What are the most pressing questions?  Differ from region to region  Depend on needs on stakeholder  What questions can SNAP help address?  What data are and are NOT available?  How much time/funding is available?  Role of uncertainty  Desired products  Maps, reports, presentations, websites, etc.

14. Broad-scale Regional Local

16. Length of above-freezing season and GDD by cluster. Days above freezing were estimated via linear interpolation between monthly mean temperatures. Growing degree days (GDD) were calculated using 0°C as a baseline. Warm-season and cold-season precipitation by cluster. The majority of precipitation in months with mean temperatures below freezing is assumed to be snow (measured as rainwater equivalent). 16

17. http://land cover.usgs.gov/nalcms.php North American Land Change Monitoring System (NALCMS 2005) AVHRR Land cover, 1995 Created 2/4/11 3:00 PM by Conservation Biology Institute GlobCover 2009 Alaska Biomes and Canadian Ecoregions. 17

18. Projected cliomes for the five-model composite, A1B (mid-range ) climate scenario. Alaska and the Yukon are shown at 2km resolution and NWT at 10 minute lat/long resolution. Future Projections Original 18 clusters 18

19.  Changing climatic conditions are rapidly impacting environmental, social, and economic conditions in and around National Park System areas in Alaska.  Alaska park managers need to better understand possible climate change trends in order to better manage Arctic, subarctic, and coastal ecosystems and human uses. 19  NPS and SNAP are collaborating on a three-year project that will help Alaska NPS managers, cooperating personnel, and key stakeholders to develop plausible climate change scenarios for all NPS areas in Alaska.

20. Aleutian WWII not included in assessment Aniakchak Lake Clark Kenai Fjords Katmai 20

21. Mean winter precipitation. These maps show the projected precipitation for December, January, and February for selected decades. Although increased precipitation is expected, warmer temperatures may result in less snow. Mean annual ground temperature at one meter depth. Based on SNAP climate data and GIPL permafrost modeling, these maps depict likely ground temperature conditions. Widespread loss of frozen ground is likely by the end of the century.

22. 22 Matrix showing the intersection of changes thaw days (summer season) and precipitation, as each pertains to inland (riverine) regions. Each quadrant yields a set of future conditions which are plausible, challenging, relevant, and divergent. “Juneau/Helly Hansen” B ”Smokey” A “Freeze-Dried” C ”Little Ice Age” D Thaw Days More, with warming PDO High variation Less Variation Less, with cold phase PDO Precipitation

23. 23 “SMOKEY” Drought stressed vegetation Increase in disease/pests Longer growing season Maximum shrub expansion (less overland access) Long-term reduction stream flow Initially higher stream flows from seasonal glacial melt Reduction/loss glaciers Increased fire on landscape 40% reduction in salmon fry due to smaller fry. Katmai Brooks Camp barge requires glacier melt for high lake levels…this world would minimize access with warming and less precipitation. Less biting insects Decrease in waterfowl Exposure of cultural resources Lowering of groundwater tables. More fugitive dust with Pebble Mine Decrease in stream flow Increase competition in water. Decrease in subsistence (difficult winter travel)

24. Matrix showing Riverine climate scenarios nested in a social and institutional framework. Each quadrant yields four linked scenarios; three are selected in red. 24

25. Facilities Infrastructure risks, fire protection costs Melting permafrost, damage to infrastructure (buildings) Interpretation and Education Maintaining relevant agency in- reach efforts Public/visitor education costs and challenges Greater need for public application of ecosystem services Protection Fire management, public safety risks F&W regulations, harvest quotas, seasons Physical Resources Hydrological cycle changes Reduction in available water Biological Resources Major biome shift Increase in fire, increase in pests/disease Pond Conversion to uplands ESA Issues Species management concerns Cultural Resources Exposure of artifacts Socio/Economic Conservation of F&W for subsistence & recreation Access and transportation issues

26. NameSpeciesHair/FurAge Appetite Level Size Preliminary Porridge Assessment Preliminary Mattress Assessment GoldilocksHumanBlonde8ModeratePetiteN/A PapaBearBrown12HighBigToo HotToo Hard MamaBearTawny11ModerateMediumToo ColdToo Soft BabyBear Red- Brown 3LowSmallJust Right Global Business Network (GBN) -- A member of the Monitor Group Copyright 2010 Monitor Company Group

27. Data, research and monitoring  Create seamless data sets  Collaborate with researchers and monitoring programs to track changes in PDO and ocean acidification  Increase fluidity and connections between research and monitoring  Conduct coastal/marine/onshore ecosystem monitoring 27 Collaboration and outreach  Coordinate communication with other agencies  Get missing players to the climate change scenario table at subsequent meetings  Provide science outreach and education to multiple audiences  Identify and cooperate with private/public entities for partnerships  Re-imagine how institutions can work together to solve common problems. Flexibility and innovation  Tune planning process to account for multiple possibilities  Model, collaborate and promote energy efficient technologies  Create portable, flexible structures

29.  Interviews  Growing Degree Day Analysis Photo by Nancy Tarnai Ellen Hatch (Thesis project, SNRAS)

32. All SNAP data and outputs are available under a Creative Commons license. Currently, 24 ongoing and completed projects are linked on the SNAP website, in addition to reports, videos, presentations, and papers. www.snap.uaf.edu