Suchergebnisse

Over the last two decades a number of heatwaves have brought the need for heatwave early warning systems (HEWS) to the attention of many European governments. The HEWS in Europe are operating under the assumption that there is a high correlation between observed and forecasted temperatures. We investigated the sensitivity of different temperature mortality relationships when using forecast temperatures. We modelled mortality in Stockholm using observed temperatures and made predictions using forecast temperatures from the European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts to assess the sensitivity. We found that the forecast will alter the expected future risk differently for different temperature mortality relationships. The more complex models seemed more sensitive to inaccurate forecasts. Despite the difference between models, there was a high agreement between models when identifying risk-days. We find that considerations of the accuracy in temperature forecasts should be part of the design of a HEWS. Currently operating HEWS do evaluate their predictive performance; this information should also be part of the evaluation of the epidemiological models that are the foundation in the HEWS. The most accurate description of the relationship between high temperature and mortality might not be the most suitable or practical when incorporated into a HEWS.

Over the last two decades a number of heatwaves have brought the need for heatwave early warning systems (HEWS) to the attention of many European governments. The HEWS in Europe are operating under the assumption that there is a high correlation between observed and forecasted temperatures. We investigated the sensitivity of different temperature mortality relationships when using forecast temperatures. We modelled mortality in Stockholm using observed temperatures and made predictions using forecast temperatures from the European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts to assess the sensitivity. We found that the forecast will alter the expected future risk differently for different temperature mortality relationships. The more complex models seemed more sensitive to inaccurate forecasts. Despite the difference between models, there was a high agreement between models when identifying risk-days. We find that considerations of the accuracy in temperature forecasts should be part of the design of a HEWS. Currently operating HEWS do evaluate their predictive performance; this information should also be part of the evaluation of the epidemiological models that are the foundation in the HEWS. The most accurate description of the relationship between high temperature and mortality might not be the most suitable or practical when incorporated into a HEWS.

Over the last two decades a number of heatwaves have brought the need for heatwave early warning systems (HEWS) to the attention of many European governments. The HEWS in Europe are operating under the assumption that there is a high correlation between observed and forecasted temperatures. We investigated the sensitivity of different temperature mortality relationships when using forecast temperatures. We modelled mortality in Stockholm using observed temperatures and made predictions using forecast temperatures from the European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts to assess the sensitivity. We found that the forecast will alter the expected future risk differently for different temperature mortality relationships. The more complex models seemed more sensitive to inaccurate forecasts. Despite the difference between models, there was a high agreement between models when identifying risk-days. We find that considerations of the accuracy in temperature forecasts should be part of the design of a HEWS. Currently operating HEWS do evaluate their predictive performance; this information should also be part of the evaluation of the epidemiological models that are the foundation in the HEWS. The most accurate description of the relationship between high temperature and mortality might not be the most suitable or practical when incorporated into a HEWS.

Ozone air pollution is identified as one of the main threats bearing upon human health and ecosystems, with 25 000 deaths in 2005 attributed to surface ozone in Europe (IIASA 2013 TSAP Report #10). In addition, there is a concern that climate change could negate ozone pollution mitigation strategies, making them insufficient over the long run and jeopardising chances to meet the long term objective set by the European Union Directive of 2008 (Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008) (60 ppbv, daily maximum). This effect has been termed the ozone climate penalty. One way of assessing this climate penalty is by driving chemistry-transport models with future climate projections while holding the ozone precursor emissions constant (although the climate penalty may also be influenced by changes in emission of precursors). Here we present an analysis of the robustness of the climate penalty in Europe across time periods and scenarios by analysing the databases underlying 11 articles published on the topic since 2007, i.e. a total of 25 model projections. This substantial body of literature has never been explored to assess the uncertainty and robustness of the climate ozone penalty because of the use of different scenarios, time periods and ozone metrics. Despite the variability of model design and setup in this database of 25 model projection, the present meta-analysis demonstrates the significance and robustness of the impact of climate change on European surface ozone with a latitudinal gradient from a penalty bearing upon large parts of continental Europe and a benefit over the North Atlantic region of the domain. Future climate scenarios present a penalty for summertime (JJA) surface ozone by the end of the century (2071–2100) of at most 5 ppbv. Over European land surfaces, the 95% confidence interval of JJA ozone change is [0.44; 0.64] and [0.99; 1.50] ppbv for the 2041–2070 and 2071–2100 time windows, respectively.

Ozone air pollution is identified as one of the main threats bearing upon human health and ecosystems, with 25 000 deaths in 2005 attributed to surface ozone in Europe (IIASA 2013 TSAP Report #10). In addition, there is a concern that climate change could negate ozone pollution mitigation strategies, making them insufficient over the long run and jeopardising chances to meet the long term objective set by the European Union Directive of 2008 (Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008) (60 ppbv, daily maximum). This effect has been termed the ozone climate penalty. One way of assessing this climate penalty is by driving chemistry-transport models with future climate projections while holding the ozone precursor emissions constant (although the climate penalty may also be influenced by changes in emission of precursors). Here we present an analysis of the robustness of the climate penalty in Europe across time periods and scenarios by analysing the databases underlying 11 articles published on the topic since 2007, i.e. a total of 25 model projections. This substantial body of literature has never been explored to assess the uncertainty and robustness of the climate ozone penalty because of the use of different scenarios, time periods and ozone metrics. Despite the variability of model design and setup in this database of 25 model projection, the present meta-analysis demonstrates the significance and robustness of the impact of climate change on European surface ozone with a latitudinal gradient from a penalty bearing upon large parts of continental Europe and a benefit over the North Atlantic region of the domain. Future climate scenarios present a penalty for summertime (JJA) surface ozone by the end of the century (2071-2100) of at most 5 ppbv. Over European land surfaces, the 95% confidence interval of JJA ozone change is [0.44; 0.64] and [0.99; 1.50] ppbv for the 2041-2070 and 2071-2100 time windows, respectively.

Ozone air pollution is identified as one of the main threats bearing upon human health and ecosystems, with 25 000 deaths in 2005 attributed to surface ozone in Europe (IIASA 2013 TSAP Report #10). In addition, there is a concern that climate change could negate ozone pollution mitigation strategies, making them insufficient over the long run and jeopardising chances to meet the long term objective set by the European Union Directive of 2008 (Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008) (60 ppbv, daily maximum). This effect has been termed the ozone climate penalty. One way of assessing this climate penalty is by driving chemistry-transport models with future climate projections while holding the ozone precursor emissions constant (although the climate penalty may also be influenced by changes in emission of precursors). Here we present an analysis of the robustness of the climate penalty in Europe across time periods and scenarios by analysing the databases underlying 11 articles published on the topic since 2007, i.e. a total of 25 model projections. This substantial body of literature has never been explored to assess the uncertainty and robustness of the climate ozone penalty because of the use of different scenarios, time periods and ozone metrics. Despite the variability of model design and setup in this database of 25 model projection, the present meta-analysis demonstrates the significance and robustness of the impact of climate change on European surface ozone with a latitudinal gradient from a penalty bearing upon large parts of continental Europe and a benefit over the North Atlantic region of the domain. Future climate scenarios present a penalty for summertime (JJA) surface ozone by the end of the century (2071-2100) of at most 5 ppbv. Over European land surfaces, the 95% confidence interval of JJA ozone change is [0.44; 0.64] and [0.99; 1.50] ppbv for the 2041-2070 and 2071-2100 time windows, respectively.

Ozone air pollution is identified as one of the main threats bearing upon human health and ecosystems, with 25 000 deaths in 2005 attributed to surface ozone in Europe (IIASA 2013 TSAP Report #10). In addition, there is a concern that climate change could negate ozone pollution mitigation strategies, making them insufficient over the long run and jeopardising chances to meet the long term objective set by the European Union Directive of 2008 (Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008) (60 ppbv, daily maximum). This effect has been termed the ozone climate penalty. One way of assessing this climate penalty is by driving chemistry-transport models with future climate projections while holding the ozone precursor emissions constant (although the climate penalty may also be influenced by changes in emission of precursors). Here we present an analysis of the robustness of the climate penalty in Europe across time periods and scenarios by analysing the databases underlying 11 articles published on the topic since 2007, i.e. a total of 25 model projections. This substantial body of literature has never been explored to assess the uncertainty and robustness of the climate ozone penalty because of the use of different scenarios, time periods and ozone metrics. Despite the variability of model design and setup in this database of 25 model projection, the present meta-analysis demonstrates the significance and robustness of the impact of climate change on European surface ozone with a latitudinal gradient from a penalty bearing upon large parts of continental Europe and a benefit over the North Atlantic region of the domain. Future climate scenarios present a penalty for summertime (JJA) surface ozone by the end of the century (2071-2100) of at most 5 ppbv. Over European land surfaces, the 95% confidence interval of JJA ozone change is [0.44; 0.64] and [0.99; 1.50] ppbv for the 2041-2070 and 2071-2100 time windows, respectively.