Reevaluation of Climate Scenarios Sparks Debate

Technical papers on climate modeling rarely spark public debate or grab the White House’s attention. However, an international research team’s revision of emissions scenarios used in global warming studies has done just that.

Climate scientists typically model possible temperature increases on Earth by examining different scenarios of human pollution contributing to global warming. These scenarios get updated roughly every seven years. The most recent update saw the researchers abandon RCP8.5, a high-emissions scenario used in many studies over the past decade. The authors deemed this scenario “implausible” due to recent energy trends.

The decision has prompted debate among scientists online. Critics of the high-emissions scenario argued for years that it was unrealistic partly because it predicted countries burning coal at untenably high rates. They suggested that studies and reports based on RCP8.5 overstated climate change risks. These critics now want to know why this change didn’t happen sooner.

Despite this, other researchers highlight that extreme warming remains a possibility. Although the odds are low, they argue that studying high-emissions scenarios still holds scientific value.