1. Future emissions (ScenarioMIP)
Co-chairs:
Brian O’Neill; Claudia Tebaldi; Detlef van Vuuren
Scientific Steering Committee:
Pierre Friedlingstein; George Hurtt; Reto Knutti; Jean-Francois Lamarque; Jason Lowe; Jerry Meehl; Richard Moss; Ben Sanderson; Veronica Eyring

2. Goal ScenarioMIP: Simulate future climate outcomes based on alternative plausible future scenarios
1. Facilitating integrated research across climate science, IAM and IAV communities.
2. Anchoring targeted experiments (e.g land-use change/air chemistry) to answer questions about specific forcings.
Core
ScenarioMIP
Together with LUMIP, CMIP etc
RCPs
Climate
SSPs
Impact
Exposed population, ability to
adapt
Drivers (population, GDP)
Energy use,
Land use
Emissions
Conc./
forcing
Climate/
Environmental change

3. The Scenario Matrix Architecture
SSP1
SSP2
SSP3
Shared Socio-economic Pathways
SSP4
SSP5
RCPs
Forcing level (W/m2)
8.5
6.0
4.5
2.6
Climate
SSPs

4. The Scenario Matrix Architecture
Shared Socio-economic Pathways
SSP1
SSP2
SSP3
SSP4
SSP5
Challenge to mitigation
Challenge to adaptation

5. SSPs (Energy) SSP5 (Fossil-fueled growth) SSP3 (Regional rivalry) SSP2
1850
1900
1950
2000
2050
2100 EJ
500
1000
1500
2500
Other renewables
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Biomass
SSP3
(Regional rivalry)
SSP5
(Fossil-fueled
growth)
1850
1900
1950
2000
2050
2100 EJ
500
1000
1500
2500
Other renewables
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Biomass
SSP2
(Middle of the road)
1850
1900
1950
2000
2050
2100 EJ
500
1000
1500
2500
Other renewables
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Biomass
SSP1
(Sustainability)
SSP4
(Inequality)

6. The Scenario Matrix Architecture
Forcing level (W/m2)
8.5
6.0
4.5
2.6
SSP1
SSP2
SSP3
Shared Socio-economic Pathways
SSP4
SSP5

7. ScenarioMIP Experimental Design
Tier 1
SSP5-8.5 Continuity with CMIP5 and representative of high end of range.
SSP3-7 Filling the gap; Representative of many unmitigated SSP baseline scenarios. Interesting afforestation/airpollution burden (LUMIP/AerChemMIP)
SSP2-4.5 Continuity with CMIP5 and interest from CORDEX/Decadal Prediction/DAMIP.
SSP1-2.6 Continuity with CMIP5 and representative of low end of range.
Tier 2
SSP1-6.0 Continuity
SSP4-3.7 Filling the Gap (interesting mitigation target less stringent than RCP2.6)
Overshoot scenario
SSP3-7 ensemble enriching the exploration of internal variability.
Long-term extensions (3) to address slow-response components of the climate system
(ice sheet, sea level rise).
Overshoot
Ext.
Ens
Ext + OS.
Tier3 -> 1.5oC scenario

8. World CO2 Emissions
Harmonisation with historic emission and concentration range
Translation of future emissions into concentration

9. Reference scenarios, relative to 2005 = 1)
Land maps
Reference scenarios, relative to 2005 = 1)
1.5
IAM range
SSP marker
Cooperation with George Hurtt to translate these into harmonised maps
SSP3
1.4
High population
& low agr. productivity
1.3
SSP5
1.2
SSP2
SSP4
million ha (2005=1)
1.1
1.0
Sustainable development
SSP1
0.9
0.8
0.7
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100

10. World Sulfur Emissions
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
Sulfur (MtS) 20 40 60 80
100
120
140
160
IAM teams translate these into scenarios of future emissions based on gridded historical emissions?
Coordinated effort to create concentration data
IAM range
SSP marker
RCPs
SSP3
SSP2
SSP4
SSP5
SSP1

11. Process 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Oct. 2016? I PCC Mee t ng
WG1, WG2, WG3 representatives: design of assessment scheme
Oct. 2016? I
PCC
Mee t ng
March 2016
IAM teams : quantified scenarios
2.0W/m2
Overshoot
ScenarioMIP
runs
ScenarioMIP
Harmonised land use
Historical
data
Jan
2016
Harmonised emissions
Atm. Chemistry runs
Extensions
13 november 2018
Special
Issue

12. Questions?
13 november 2018

13. Data availability and resolution
All data publicly accessible at
the SSP database
National data (since 2013):
GDP
Population (structure, education, tot)
Urbanization
IAM scenario data (for illustration)
Energy
Land-use
Emissions
Forcing & Temperature
Other relevant indicators (carbon price, economic feedbacks, etc..)
Resolution: 5 World Regions (more details available from IAM teams regions)
Add UCAR page and names from the ICONICS committee

14. Characteristics: Small number (3 in Tier 1)
In each tier a High, Medium and Low by 2100
Tier 1 still spans a plausible high/low(2oC) range; 6.0 is seen as what would come from current policies
Tier 2: 7.0 important for impact assessment; 3.7 considered an important mitigation target; updates 4.5.
Updated drivers support IAM/IAV research into the 2020’s through not only new IAM and climate models but new socio-economic assumptions.
Variants of the same scenarios can be used to explore targeted questions about sensitivity to LUC, SLCF and overshoot.
** it may be (or may be not) worth making the point that the proposal can be read as updating the 4 RCPs and adding two new forcing levels – but we don’t want to undersell it!

15. Additional Issues
We recommend concentration driven (better constraining forcing levels and thus making integrated research easier to compare and summarize across studies)
We recommend concentrating IC ensemble members for one scenario only (RCP8.5? RCP4.5? Depending possibly on other MIPs recommended experiments)
We are interested in long-term extensions, TBD

16. Time-line 2014 2016 2015 ScenarioMIP proposal / Garmisch
IAM model runs open review
Finalisation IAM model runs, IPCC conference
Decisions on scenarios
Data available after harmonisation, downscaling
etc