Fiches info

The ocean ecosystem is a vital component of the global carbon cycle, storing enough carbon to keep atmospheric CO2 considerably lower than it would otherwise be. However, this conception is based on simple models, neglecting the coupled land-ocean feedback. Using an interactive Earth system model, we show that the role ocean biology plays in controlling atmospheric CO2 is more complex than previously thought. Atmospheric CO2 in a new equilibrium state after the biological pump is shut down increases by more than 50% (163 ppm), lower than expected as approximately half the carbon lost from the ocean is adsorbed by the land. The abiotic ocean is less capable of taking up anthropogenic carbon due to the warmer climate, an absent biological surface pCO2 deficit and a higher Revelle factor. Prioritizing research on and preserving marine ecosystem functioning would be crucial to mitigate climate change and the risks associated with it.

Under current emission trajectories, temporarily overshooting the Paris global warming limit of 1.5 °C is a distinct possibility. Permanently exceeding this limit would substantially increase the probability of triggering climate tipping elements. Here, we investigate the tipping risks associated with several policy-relevant future emission scenarios, using a stylised Earth system model of four interconnected climate tipping elements.

Simultaneous harvest failures across major crop-producing regions are a threat to global food security. Concurrent weather extremes driven by a strongly meandering jet stream could trigger such events, but so far this has not been quantified. Specifically, the ability of state-of-the art crop and climate models to adequately reproduce such high impact events is a crucial component for estimating risks to global food security. Here we find an increased likelihood of concurrent low yields during summers featuring meandering jets in observations and models. While climate models accurately simulate atmospheric patterns, associated surface weather anomalies and negative effects on crop responses are mostly underestimated in bias-adjusted simulations. Given the identified model biases, future assessments of regional and concurrent crop losses from meandering jet states remain highly uncertain. Our results suggest that model-blind spots for such high-impact but deeply-uncertain hazards have to be anticipated and acc