Developing Human System Modules for Climate Models

1. Developing Human System Modules for Climate Models Jessie Cherry, IARC/ARSC@UAF

2. Typical treatment of human/resource dimensions • Offline model runs • Use of projections and scenarios • Qualitative characterizations of the future

3. Climate Change Planning Walsh & Chapman: PRISM downscaled multi-model projections of temperature and precipitation for AK under various scenarios of Greenhouse Gas emissions

4. Problems with this approach • Creates a strong disconnect between the physical modeling community and the climate impacts community • Makes it more difficult to provide decision support to stakeholders • Could be missing important feedbacks between human agents and the climate system

5. Approaches to CCIAV IPCC, 2007

6. Integrated Assessment Definition: any model which combines scientific and socio-economic aspects of climate change primarily for the purpose of assessing policy options for climate change control (Kelly & Kolstad, 1998)

7. Integrated Assessment Modeling McGuffie & Henderson-Sellers, 2005

8. Integrated Assessment Models McGuffie & Henderson-Sellers, 2005

9. Characterizing the Future IPCC, 2007

10. Proposal: Code Human System Modules directly into a new Arctic System Model to make it truly ‘next generation’ and ‘system’

11. Example of Human System Module Goal is to be model independent; work with CCSM and other models/ couplers Cherry

12. Some Human Dimensions in the Arctic : • Oil and Gas Recovery (& spill transport) • Freshwater Supply • Renewable Energy (wind, hydro, geo) • Commercial, Subsistence, & Sport Fishing • Infrastructure • Coastal Erosion • Subsistence Harvest of Furbearers, Caribou • Marine Transport

13. Decision-Support • What is that? • Turban defines it as "an interactive, flexible, and adaptable computer-based information system, especially developed for supporting the solution of a non-structured management problem for improved decision making. It utilizes data, provides an easy-to-use interface, and allows for the decision maker's own insights.” (Wikipedia)

14. Example of Climate-Related Decision Support https://rsgis.crrel.usace.army.mil/aedis/

15. Goals of a Pilot Project • Create one or more model-independent modules for socio-economic decision-making • Test in AK, but should have international applications at least across pan-Arctic • Create cutting edge model, i.e. one that includes human dimension directly

16. Interactions between Module components/Climate model • Need not occur at every model time step • One or two way coupling may be appropriate depending on the system

17. BSIERP BSIERP Vertically Integrated models Economic/ecological model FEAST Higher trophic level model NPZ-B-D Lower trophic level ROMS Physical Oceanography Nested models BEST Climate scenarios

18. Infrastructure Impact of Climate Change on Infrastructure study done for Alaska by Peter Larsen and collaborators

19. Depr.Matrix Others Climate Projections APID Infrastructure_DB_09_28_06.sas Import_Wx_UAF_NCAR_10_10_06.sas DNR DRM UAF GI NCAR Denali $ DCCED Depreciator_10_10_06b.sas Tables Flow Chart of Model Processes Graphs

20. ISER Public Infrastructure Study

21. Wind Farm Parameterization for WRF Adams & Keith Modification of the MYJ PBL scheme Similar work being done commercially by 3TIER, AER, others

22. MMS-WRF winds 1

23. MMS-WRF winds 2

24. MMS-WRF winds 3

25. MMS-WRF winds 4

26. AEA Energy Atlas, 2007 Hydropower AEA

27. Ship track

28. Readiness? If we don’t start to integrate these models they may never become ready… Data management may be the biggest challenge May need to modify existing couplers/design a human dimension standard May need to design ‘community’ decision support tool

29. Readiness: • Oil and Gas Recovery (& spill transport) • Freshwater Supply • Renewable Energy (wind, hydro, geo) • Commercial, Subsistence & Sport Fishing • Infrastructure • Coastal Erosion • Subsistence Harvest of Furbearers, Caribou • Marine Transport (& emissions)

30. A few of the many challenges • Data acquisition and management (international) • Models appropriate for the pan-Arctic domain • Decision support interface • Representing uncertainty quantitatively (including inter-temporal discount rate)

31. Why code human systems directly into models? • There are (nearly) appropriate existing models • We have the computing resources • Bridges the gaps between physical system and human dimension • It’s interesting work at the frontiers of research!!!

32. Thanks ?

33. Communicating uncertainty

34. New Scientific Methodology? Funtowicz & Ravetz, in Ecological Economics, 1991

35. Arctic human dimensions • Oil and Gas Module (spill transport) • Rural Resilience (wind power potential) • Coastal Erosion (evolving coastline) • Freshwater (hydropower, water supply) • Marine Fisheries (Bering ecosystem) • Marine Transport (ice cover trajectories)

36. BSIERP Lower Trophic Level Ecosystem Model Predation Losses Euphausiids Detritus 14 component Model NPZD-Benthos Neocalanus Pseudocalanus Large microzooplankton Small microzooplankton Small Phytoplankton Large Phytoplankton Iron Nitrate Ammonium Benthic Detritus Benthic Infauna Benthos