5/16/2023 0 Comments Physical weather indicatorTo inform our selection of cases, we considered over 30 potential combinations of climate hazards, sectors, and geographies based on a review of the literature and expert interviews on the potential direct impacts of physical climate hazards. These cover a range of sectors and geographies and provide the basis of a “micro-to-macro” approach that is a characteristic of MGI research. In order to link physical climate risk to socioeconomic impact, we investigate nine specific cases where climate change extremes are measurable. RCP 8.5, because of the higher-emissions, lower-mitigation scenario it portrays, in order to assess physical risk in the absence of further decarbonization.Ĭase studies. Since the research in this report is most concerned with understanding inherent physical risks, we have chosen to focus on the higher-emission scenario, i.e. By 2100, the four RCPs lead to very different levels of warming, but the divergence is moderate out to 2050 and small to 2030. Each RCP was created by an independent modeling team and there is no consistent design of the socio-economic parameter assumptions used in the derivation of the RCPs. During their inception, RCPs were designed to collectively sample the range of then-probable future emission pathways, ranging from lower (RCP 2.6) to higher (RCP 8.5) CO 2 concentrations. ![]() They outline different atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration trajectories between 20. Four “Representative Concentration Pathways” (RCPs) act as standardized inputs to climate models. We draw on climate model forecasts to showcase how the climate has changed and could continue to change, how a changing climate creates new risks and uncertainties, and what steps can be taken to best manage them. Here, we highlight key methodological choices:Ĭhoice of climate scenario. WHRC’s work draws on the most widely used and thoroughly peer-reviewed ensemble of climate models to estimate the probabilities of relevant climate events occurring. ![]() Most of the climatological analysis performed for this report was done by Woods Hole Research Center (WHRC), and in other instances, we relied on publicly available climate science data, for example from institutions like the World Resources Institute. ![]() Our focus in this report has been on translating the climate science data into an assessment of physical risk and its implications for stakeholders. While many scientists, including climate scientists, are employed at McKinsey & Company, we are not a climate modeling institution. In this report, we measure the impact of climate change by the extent to which it could affect human beings, human-made physical assets, and the natural world.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |