Compliments, thoughts for June 23 webinar

Vanessa Schweizer

Vanessa Schweizer
New member
Thanks to the organizers and speakers for a great webinar. A few comments to which I would like to share some thoughts:
  1. Thanks to Kate Ricke as well as Tyler Felgenhauer & David Morrow for providing some guidance on how the current scenarios architecture (RCPs, SSPs, SPAs) could be expanded to be better suited for climate interventions research, namely deployments of SRM. For a start on such scenario studies, it's not clear that we need to 'throw the RCP/SSP/SPA baby out' of the bathtub. So far, it looks like the existing architecture simply did not have questions unique to SRM explicitly represented, so we should start with filling gaps. In other words, I see that we have a baby in the tub. It needs water to take a bath. The recommendations from Kate, Tyler, and David are helpful for gap filling in that regard (i.e. adding the needed water).
  2. Concerns about a 'proliferation of scenarios'. I presume that where Dale is coming from is that we may not wish to see a proliferation of scenario frameworks. I would agree, as a proliferation of frameworks will make it more difficult to compare scenarios. However, a proliferation of scenarios is probably desirable, as there are many actors with many decisions to make. The actors need to see themselves (i.e. their decision contexts, things that they care about) in the scenarios. Scenarios need to be fit for purpose.
  3. There was some chatter about CMIP scenarios, impact scenarios, etc. and whether they are sufficient for studying climate interventions. Perhaps it would be helpful to have a discussion about what the purposes of these different scenario exercises are so that we can gauge the fit of RCP/SSP/SPAs, expansions, revisions, a new generation of scenarios, etc.
    1. On the note of impacts and whether they should be incorporated into scenarios, some of the research featured by Massimo was really informative to show the difference between SSPs as study inputs and what the findings of impact studies have to say. Under 3 degrees, a scenario like SSP2 simply won't hold together and will evolve into more of an SSP4 situation (Gazzotti et al. 2021). From the figures featured in the presentation, I would say the Gazotti example does not necessarily show a limitation of the RCP/SSP framework; instead, it is a great example of how the scenarios could be applied.