Abstract
This chapter discusses the general aspects of climate variability and climate change in South America, with a special focus on Brazil’s northeast region in which the Caatinga is located. It describes the main findings reported in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC AR5), and provides a brief review of the literature addressing climate change in northeast Brazil. In addition, simulations and projections of temperature and precipitation changes provided by 24 state-of-the art Earth System Models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) dataset that were analyzed in the IPCC AR5 are assessed. For scenarios of future projections, the near surface air temperature should increase by at least 1 °C for the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) 2.6 (low radiative forcing scenario) and by 4 °C for the RCP8.5 (high radiative forcing scenario) by the end of the twenty-first century. For the Caatinga, there is a considerable spread amongst rainfall change projections of ±1 mm day−1, relative to 1961–1990, making it hard to identify any tendency in projected rainfall change. However, the RCP8.5 forcing scenario shows a slight rainfall reduction of about 0.3 mm day−1 by 2100. Among the most affected regions in Brazil, the Amazon and northeast regions appear to be large hotspots. For some modeling studies, projections of the future climate show a savannization of parts of the Amazon and desertification of the Caatinga region, with potential adverse impacts on biodiversity, supply and quality of water resources, carbon storage, and the provision of other ecosystem services.
Access provided by CONRICYT-eBooks. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
Earth’s climate shows variabilities in almost all time scales, from the annual to the multi-decadal scale. In some of these scales, climate variability is due to the intrinsically random nature of processes or due to numerous and complex causes (often unknown or poorly understood scientifically) that make it difficult to forecast (Giorgi 2005). Therefore, the use of climate information is frequently based on statistical analysis of historical series of observed climate variables (Barros et al. 2006).
Several decades ago, the use of climate information was based on the hypothesis that the climate was stationary, at least in the decadal scale, and thus future climatic conditions could be predicted only using a robust series of observed data in previous decades (Barros et al. 2006). However, this hypothesis of climate stationarity is no longer accepted by the scientific community given abundant evidence that human activities have contributed to a rapid change in known climatic patterns (IPCC 2007, 2013).
In this context, the term ‘climate change’ refers to a change in the state of the climate locally or globally, which can be identified (e.g., using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties (e.g., rainfall, temperature, wind), and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer (Giorgi 2005; IPCC 2007). Climate change may be due to natural internal processes of the climate systemFootnote 1 (e.g., the occurrence of El Niño/La Niña events in the seasonal to interannual time scale) or external forcings, or to persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use (Glossary of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report [IPCC AR4] [IPCC 2007]).
Since its formation about 4.6 billion years ago, Earth’s climate has undergone numerous changes due to the natural variability of the climate system. These natural changes occurred mainly as a result of the following external forcings:
-
Changes in the structure and composition of the Earth’s atmosphere during its formation
-
Continental drift
-
Variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession of Earth’s orbit (Milankovitch cycles)
-
Volcanic eruptions, which cause the release of particles into the atmosphere (especially aerosols) that can be suspended for up to several months at higher levels of the atmosphere
These factors , which are cyclic in most cases, change the radiation balance in the climate system and cause large changes in the temperature of the planet (IPCC 2007). However, except for volcanic eruptions, these changes occur on a scale of thousands of years, which is too slow to be perceived in the lives of human beings. For this reason, the changes in climate that scientists have observed in recent decades (and which are included in the various reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC]) are more intense and faster than those observed for any known natural factor (IPCC 2007, 2013).
On the other hand, other external forcings that can also significantly contribute to a change in climate are those arising from human activities , such as changes in the composition of the atmosphere and land use changes,Footnote 2 which occur on time scales compatible with those abrupt changes observed in Earth’s climate in recent decades (Meehl et al. 2007). These forcings are primarily responsible for the so-called ‘greenhouse effect .’ This term has been used since the nineteenth century to refer to a natural phenomenon associated with the property that some gases in the atmosphere (greenhouse gases [GHGs]) absorb and isotropically re-emit the long-wave radiation (specifically, thermal infrared radiation) emitted by Earth’s surface (Meehl et al. 2007; IPCC 2007). Part of this radiation is directed back to the surface and lower levels of the atmosphere, resulting in a temperature rise of Earth’s surface and the surrounding air.
GHGs are those gaseous constituents of the atmosphere, both natural and anthropogenic, that absorb and emit radiation at specific wavelengths within the spectrum of thermal infrared radiation emitted by the Earth’s surface, the atmosphere itself, and by clouds. This property causes the greenhouse effect. Water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), methane (CH4), and ozone (O3) are the primary GHGs in the Earth’s atmosphere (Glossary of IPCC AR4, [IPCC 2007]).
However, the greenhouse effect is essential to Earth. Without it, life on Earth would not be possible, because without this, the mean temperature near the surface would be about −19 °C, in contrast to the +15 °C observed (IPCC 2007). Therefore, GHGs are critical to maintaining the planet being able to house all living beings. However, in recent decades, the greenhouse effect has taken on a negative connotation, being associated with climate change and global warming. This is due to the fact that with the intense and growing GHG emissions resulting from human activities, the greenhouse effect has intensified so that a larger amount of radiation is trapped in the lower layers of the atmosphere, and, hence, the temperature of the planet increases and some changes in Earth’s climate occur.
Since the industrial revolution , the concentration of GHGs has increased remarkably in the atmosphere. For example, the concentration of CO2 increased by over 35%, while the concentration of CH4 increased by more than 2.5 times (IPCC 2007). The global increase in CO2 concentration is mainly due to the use of fossil fuels and land use change, while the increase in CH4 and N2O concentrations is due primarily to agricultural and livestock practices (IPCC 2007).
The distinction between the effects caused by various external forcings and the natural variability of the climate system requires a careful comparison between the changes observed and those expected as a result of certain forcings. The studies that address this issue are known as ‘detection and attribution of climate change’ studies; they are based on thorough physical understanding of the mechanisms and feedbacks that govern the climate system and use a statistically complex and cautious treatment of the observed data (Hegerl et al. 2007; Stott et al. 2010).
Since the innumerous processes occurring in the climate system cannot be accurately reproduced in a laboratory experiment, scientists use numerical models known as climate models or Earth System Models (ESMs) to understand the possible responses and behaviors of this system when submitted to certain forcings, as well as to project the climate in the coming decades and centuries (Giorgi 2005). A climate model consists of a huge system of discretized differential equations of high complexity (transformed into a computer code containing thousands of command lines and subroutines) representing, among other things, the physical, chemical, and biological laws that govern the behavior of the climate system components (ocean, atmosphere, biosphere, etc.) and their interactions.
When the climate system is highly complex and has many processes that are still unknown or poorly understood by scientists (Giorgi 2005), climate models are approximate representations of this system. However, climate models are gradually evolving with the emergence of new scientific discoveries and new methods of analysis and measurement. This evolution can be observed, for example, through the five generations of climate models belonging to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project [CMIP ] (http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov).
However, even though climate models are approximations of the climate system, the extent to which a model is able to reproduce the main features and the variability of the observed climate increases our confidence that this model can project future changes in climate (Torres and Marengo 2013, 2014). Moreover, despite the complexity involved in the simulation of the climate system, in large spatial scales and decadal and longer time scales it is expected that it will be possible to simulate the climate with reasonable reliability (Knutti 2008).
With the advancement of studies on climate change in recent years, the vast majority of climate scientists around the world take the fact that human activities are primarily responsible for observed climate changes for granted (IPCC 2007, 2012, 2013). Such changes are known as anthropogenic climate changes. The influence of humans in modifying both the composition of the atmosphere and the land surface of the continents during the last centuries has become so marked that some scientists have established a new geological era up to the present day known as ‘Anthropocene’, a term coined by the winner of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1995, Paul Crutzen.
In order to better understand and try to project the climate in the coming decades, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) established the IPCC in 1988. The IPCC consists of a group of hundreds of scientists from different countries around the world who meet periodically to discuss the latest research and discoveries about climate change. During these meetings, the scientists assess the current knowledge on climate change and prepare technical reports on possible impacts of climate change on humans and the planet’s biodiversity in order to assist policy- and decision-makers in the design of adaptive and sustainable measures for countries.
According to the information contained in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC AR5 ) published in 2013, scientists conclude that the warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and many of the observed changes since the 1950s are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the snow and ice have diminished, the sea level has risen, and the concentrations of GHGs have increased (IPCC 2013). Additionally, scientists conclude that it is very likely that emissions of anthropogenic GHGs affected the Earth’s climate in the twentieth century and will continue to cause further warming and changes even more markedly in this century.
The global mean surface temperature over the last 100 years increased by approximately 0.7 °C, with most of that increase situated in the latter half of the twentieth century following the large increase in anthropogenic emissions during this period. According to climate projections for 2081–2100 relative to 1986–2005 contained in the IPCC AR5, the increase in global mean temperature is likely to be in the range of between 1 °C and 4 °C, accompanied by an increase of precipitation of around 2–6%. Moreover, these projections also indicate that most of these changes in temperature and precipitation around the world will be accompanied by more frequent extreme events such as heat waves, droughts, and heavy rains, which will cause numerous impacts on populations around the world (IPCC 2013).
Following the general context of climate change given already, Sect. 15.2 presents current climate simulations of near surface air temperature and rainfall over the Caatinga region produced by innumerous state-of-the-art ESMs. Climate simulations of precipitation and temperature are evaluated against observations to provide a measure of reliability of climate change projections and related uncertainties. Section 15.3 shows temperature and precipitation change projections covering the entire twenty-first century over the Caatinga region, as well as trends in climate extremes in the region. Finally, Sect. 15.4 presents some concluding remarks.
2 Present Climate Simulations Over the Caatinga Region by Earth System Models
As stated in the previous section, the current climate change projections are based exclusively on the use of climate models or ESMs, such as those belonging to the CMIP Phase 5 (CMIP5) dataset, the results of which are presented in this chapter (Table 15.1). Despite the continuous improvement of these models and the enormous growth in computing power in recent decades which enabled scientists to include numerous physical and dynamic processes and increased the spatial and temporal resolution with which they are set, the models are still being processed with spatial low resolution (of the order of hundreds of kilometers) and inadequate physical parameterizations (in part because of the difficulty of representation of some physical and dynamical processes in a low spatial scale, but also due to the still inadequate knowledge of the processes involved such as cloud parameterization) (Giorgi 2005; Collins 2007; Räisänen 2007; Tebaldi and Knutti 2007; Annan and Hargreaves 2010; Knutti et al. 2010, 2013). Thus, the ESMs do not have a perfect representation of the current climate and do not allow for a refined spatial analysis of climate change projections, essential in studies of impact, adaptation, and vulnerability .
Therefore, given the above-mentioned problems, the first step to evaluating the climate projections in a certain region is to evaluate how climate models are representing at least the basic characteristics of the current climate in this region. Thus, this section assesses how climate models represent the climate of northeastern Brazil where the Caatinga is located.
Specifically, temperature and precipitation variables provided by 24 state-of-the art ESMs (representing nearly 450 runs, Table 15.1) from the CMIP5 dataset (Taylor et al. 2012) that were analyzed in the IPCC AR5 are assessed. The CMIP5 climate simulations and projections analyzed in this chapter were provided by the Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison (PCMDI ; http://www-pcmdi.llnl.gov). Simulations for the twentieth century are compared against the observed surface air temperature and precipitation from the CRU TS 3.0 dataset (Mitchell and Jones 2005) produced by the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (UEA/CRU). Hereafter, the term ‘simulation’ refers to those numerical experiments with ESMs performed to observed climate periods (e.g., 1901–2000), and the term ‘projection’ refers to those experiments relating to future periods (e.g., 2020–2100) carried out by a given climate forcing. Moreover, changes refer to the difference between the mean values of the climate variables projected for the period 2071–2100 (‘future climate’) and simulated for 1961–1990 (‘present-day’ climate). Additionally, climate simulations and projections are evaluated at seasonal means as follows: austral summer (December to February [DJF]), fall (March to May [MAM]), winter (June to August [JJA]), and spring (September to November [SON]).
The CMIP5 climate projections are performed using the new generation of radiative forcingFootnote 3 scenarios called Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) (Moss et al. 2010), and denominated as RCP 2.6, 4.5, 6.0, and 8.5, corresponding to an approximate radiative forcing by the end of the century of 2.6, 4.5, 6.0, and 8.5 Wm−2, respectively, relative to pre-industrial conditions. With regard to the equivalent CO2 concentrations, these RCPs correspond roughly to 490, 650, 850, and 1370 ppm, respectively, in 2100. Further details of the RCPs can be found, for example, in Moss et al. (2010) and van Vuuren et al. (2011).
Compared to the previous generation of climate models belonging to the CMIP Phase 3 (CMIP3) dataset, CMIP5 ESMs show slightly higher horizontal resolutions (approximately 1–3 ° of latitude/longitude) and also includes ESMs and experiments that are more comprehensive (e.g., including carbon cycle or decadal climate predictability experiments), which allows scientists to explore a broader spectrum of scientific questions. Moreover, some of the main improvements in the CMIP5 ESMs are the addition of interactive ocean and land carbon cycles of varying degrees of complexity, and the more complete representation of radiative forcings due to, among other things, the inclusion of more comprehensive modelling of the indirect effect of aerosols and the use of time-evolving volcanic and solar forcing in most models (Taylor et al. 2012; Knutti and Sedlácek 2013; Sillmann et al. 2013a).
Northeast Brazil (NEB) has a total area of about 1.5 million km2 and most of this region has a semiarid climate due to the prevailing rainfall regime (Torres and Ferreira 2011). However, while portions of the inland dry regions receive less than 600 mm of rainfall annually, the east coast receives around 2000 mm (Kousky and Chu 1978; Rao et al. 1993).
It is possible to identify different rainfall patterns in NEB. In the northern part of this region, the main rainy season occurs from March to April; in the south, the rainy season is observed from December to February; and on the east coast it occurs from May to July (Strang 1972; Rao et al. 1993). Moreover, there are regions with superimposed periods of maximum rainfall, such as the central and northeastern parts of the state of Bahia, where the maximum observed rainfall occurs from December to March, and the coastal part of Bahia, where the maximum occurs from December to May (Strang 1972; Kousky and Chu 1978). The spatial variability of annual rainfall is also high in NEB (Rao et al. 1993).
The maximum rainfall amount observed during the March–April period in northern NEB can be attributed to the latitudinal displacement of the intertropical convergence zoneFootnote 4 (ITCZ) , which reaches its southernmost position during these months (Hastenrath and Heller 1977). The observed maximum during November–December in the southern part of the region can be attributed to frontal systems that reach low latitudes and interact with convective activity from the Amazon Basin or from the northern coast of Brazil (Kousky 1979). Several attempts have been made to explain the rainfall maximum in autumn and winter along the east coast of NEB. Yamazaki and Rao (1977) emphasized the importance of westward-propagating cloud systems, as detected in satellite images over the Atlantic Ocean. Kousky (1979) showed that rainfall in eastern NEB is influenced by breeze circulations, mainly during the night. Kousky (1979) attributed the nocturnal maximum to the formation of a convergence zone between the land breeze and the background wind field. He also noted that the land breeze is strongest during autumn and winter, when the temperature contrast between land and sea is higher than normal. Studies such as Rao et al. (1993) indicate that the position and intensity of the South Atlantic subtropical high is an important mechanism for the low-level transport of water vapor toward NEB. Torres and Ferreira (2011) identified the occurrence of easterly wave disturbances in the wind field, which propagated westward over the tropical South Atlantic Ocean during the austral autumn and winter. When these disturbances interact with local circulations, low-level convergence increases, causing strong rainfall on the eastern and northern NEB coasts.
Figure 15.1a–j shows the seasonal and annual precipitation observed and simulated over the Caatinga region from the average of all CMIP5 ESMs listed in Table 15.1 for the period 1961–1990. In general, the ensemble mean represents the observed climatological patterns of precipitation over the Caatinga well. However, some biases can be observed in some localities (Fig. 15.1k–o). For example, rainfall simulations show a wet bias (up to 4 mm day−1) over the most of the region in austral summer and fall, but a very slight (<1 mm day−1) wet or dry bias in austral winter and spring.
With respect to the simulation of the near surface air temperature, the average of the ensemble is very similar to the patterns observed (Fig. 15.2a–j) and the bias does not exceed 1 °C in most of the region (Fig. 15.2k–o). On the other hand, the ensemble mean shows a cold bias (1–3 °C) in some parts of the Caatinga region from austral summer to winter.
The annual cycles of rainfall and temperature for the present climate are reasonable well-simulated by the ensemble mean of the ESMs, although different performances can be noticed when evaluating the individual models (Fig.15.3). The timing of the February–April peak of the rainy season is well-depicted by the models (Fig. 15.3a), albeit with some models underestimating or overestimating the observed rainfall. The mean observed peak of the rainy season from CRU varies from 5 to 6 mm/day, while the ensemble models show 6–7 mm/day. With regard to temperature (Fig. 15.3b), the models tend to overestimate the amplitude of the annual cycle and underestimate temperatures during summer to spring (by <1 °C).
The aforementioned deficiencies in the simulation of climate conditions in the region (represented here by precipitation and temperature) may be related to numerous factors, among which can be highlighted: (i) horizontal resolution of ESMs is still rough and does not allow a more refined detail of the topography of the region; (ii) deficiencies in the cloud parameterization schemes; (iii) deficiencies of ESMs in properly representing the water vapor transport and moisture convergence over the region; and (iv) poor representation of biosphere–atmosphere interactions, soil moisture, and other processes in the planetary boundary layer. On the other hand, there is a large deficiency in the spatial and temporal coverage of observed data over South America, which must certainly influence the magnitude and location of the bias patterns, mainly for precipitation.
Therefore, despite the bias presented by the simulations of precipitation and temperature for the models analyzed, it can be concluded that the models could represent reasonably well the observed climatic conditions over the Caatinga region, given the complexity involved in these simulations. Therefore, these results give us good reliability for use in evaluating the projections of climate change presented in Sect. 15.3.
3 Climate Change Projections in South America
Several studies have identified South America as one of the regions in the world that may be deeply affected if current climate change projections are realized, especially in the tropical region of the continent (e.g., Baettig et al. 2007; IPCC 2007, 2013; Torres et al. 2012; Sillmann et al. 2013a, b; Torres and Marengo 2014). The region is vulnerable to current climate variability and extremes, mainly in the form of intense rain and floods or dry spells, and may be affected by more frequent extremes in a warmer climate (Marengo et al. 2010a, b; Rusticucci et al. 2010).
In particular, current climatic projections indicate that considerable changes may occur in the climate of Brazil during the twenty-first century (Torres and Marengo 2014; Magrin et al. 2014). Considering that in Brazil the production of food, commodities, and energy is highly dependent on climate and that a considerable part of the population is in a socially vulnerable situation (i.e., with overall low human development levels and/or living in risky areas), it is expected that climate change will likely have strong negative social impacts (Magrin et al. 2014; Darela-Filho et al. 2016). Examples of climate-driven high social and economic costs are evident in the severe drought of 2013–2015 that negatively affected water availability in large cities in southeast Brazil (Coutinho et al. 2015) and caused relentless suffering in NEB (Lindoso et al. 2014). However, while climate change mitigation has been on the agenda of the Brazilian Government for several years (IPEA 2011), effective long-term adaptation planning has lagged. This reinforces the importance of the discussion of this issue in Brazilian society so that adaptation measures for vulnerability reduction should be taken as soon as possible to avoid greater losses.
In recent years, numerous studies have examined the projections of climate change in South America, relying mainly on climate models from the CMIP3 and CMIP5 dataset (e.g., Boulanger et al. 2006, 2007; Vera et al. 2006; Vera and Silvestri 2009; Bombardi and Carvalho 2009; Seth et al. 2010; Junquas et al. 2012; IPCC 2007, 2013; Blázquez and Nuñez 2013; Joetzjer et al. 2013; Jones and Carvalho 2013; Torres and Marengo 2014). Several studies also analyzed the climate projections in the region using some downscaling methods in the results of ESMs (e.g., Nuñez et al. 2008; Urrutia and Vuille 2009; Boulanger et al. 2010; Marengo et al. 2009, 2010a, 2012; Bidegain et al. 2012; Chou et al. 2012). In general, the projections shown in those studies are in agreement with those shown in IPCC AR5 (IPCC 2013).
According to the results presented in IPCC AR5 (IPCC 2013), warming has been detected throughout South America (around 0.7 °C to 1 °C since the mid-1970s), as well as significant trends in precipitation. In addition, changes in climate variability and in extreme events have severely affected the region. Increases in temperature extremes have been identified in most of tropical and subtropical South America, while more frequent extreme rainfall in southeastern South America has favored the occurrence of landslides and flash floods (IPCC 2013).
Regarding climate projections, all studies mentioned in IPCC AR5 suggest increases in temperature and increases or decreases in precipitation for South America by 2100. Projected warming varies from 1.7 °C (low radiative forcing scenario) to 6.7 °C (high radiative forcing scenario), where the magnitude of the major changes is located in the tropical portion of the South American continent. Rainfall changes for the region presents low confidence and varies geographically, most notably showing a reduction of 22% in NEB and an increase of 25% in southeastern South America. Additionally, projections show with medium confidence an increase in dry spells in tropical South America east of the Andes and in warm days and nights in most of this region by 2100.
Torres and Marengo (2014) identified possible hotspots of climate change in South America through an examination of the spatial pattern of the Regional Climate Change Index (RCCI) over the region by the end of twenty-first century (Fig. 15.4). The RCCI is a qualitative index that can synthesize a large number of climate model projections and is suitable for identifying those regions where climate change could be more pronounced in a warmer climate. This index is based on four variables representing climate change: change in temperature in a given specific region relative to the change in global mean temperature; change in average rainfall; and changes in the interannual variability of temperature and precipitation. All changes addressed in that study are related to projections for the period of 2071–2100 relative to 1961–1990. Torres and Marengo (2014) found that Southern Amazonia and the central-western region and western portion of Minas Gerais state in Brazil are persistent climate change hotspots through different forcing scenarios and ESMs belonging to CMIP3 and CMIP5 datasets. In general, as the scenarios vary from low- to high-level forcing, the area of high RCCI values increases and the magnitude intensifies from central-western and southeast Brazil to northwest South America. In general, the climatic hotspots identified in that study are characterized by an increase in the mean surface air temperature, mainly in the austral winter; by an increase of interannual temperature variability, predominantly in the austral summer; and by a change in the mean and interannual variability of precipitation during the austral winter. Although the Caatinga region is not identified as the most prominent hotspot in South America in that study, medium to high RCCI values can be noticed, mainly in the southern part of the region (Fig. 15.4).
4 Temperature and Precipitation Change Projections Over the Caatinga
The IPCC AR4 and AR5 (IPCC 2007, 2013) suggest that climate change is adversely affecting the ecosystems over the entire Earth. Projections of future climate using different global and regional climate models indicate that the distribution of the biomes around the world can be modified in the future due to increasing global warming, leading in general to increased aridity (Salazar et al. 2007; Lapola et al. 2009; Franchito et al. 2014). Expansion of subtropical desert and semi-desert zones and a reduction of the tropical rainforest and boreal forest can occur due to the increased GHGs concentration (IPCC 2007, 2013; Franchito et al. 2014).
The semiarid region of NEB is already vulnerable to the current interannual climate variability, and global and regional climate change projections indicate that the region will be deeply affected by a precipitation deficit and increased aridity in the next century, with negative consequences for the Caatinga (Salazar et al. 2007; Lapola et al. 2009; Franchito et al. 2014; Marengo and Bernasconi 2015; Vieira et al. 2015; Marengo et al. 2016). Rainfall variability, land degradation, and desertification are some of the factors that combined could make NEB one of the world’s most vulnerable regions to climate change, with potential adverse impacts on the rich species diversity and water resources (IPCC 2012, 2014).
The time series of annual near surface air temperature and precipitation anomalies over the Caatinga region for the historical simulations and projections under the four RCPs from the CMIP5 models listed in Table 15.1 are shown in Fig. 15.5. Regarding to the historical simulations, it is possible to identify a temperature increase of about 0.8 °C from 1901 to 2000, but there is no apparent tendency of change in the mean annual rainfall. For scenarios of future projections, the near surface air temperature should increase by approximately 1.3 °C (0.5–1.9 °C) for the RCP2.6 (low radiative forcing scenario), and by 4.4 °C (2.7–6.2 °C) for the RCP8.5 (high radiative forcing scenario) by the end of the twenty-first century, relative to the reference period 1961–1990.
Regional precipitation changes depend on regional forcings and on how climate models simulate their local and remote effects (Marengo et al. 2016). Thus, this variable has a high degree of complexity in its simulation and future projections show a high degree of uncertainty. For the Caatinga region (Fig. 15.5), there is a considerable spread among rainfall change projections of ±1 mm day−1, relative to 1961–1990, making it hard to identify any tendency in projected rainfall change. However, the RCP8.5 forcing scenario shows a slight rainfall reduction of about 0.3 mm day−1 by 2100 (Fig. 15.5).
Figures 15.6, 15.7, 15.8, and 15.9 evaluate the spatial distributions of the CMIP5-derived projections of temperature and precipitation changes over NEB by the late twenty-first century relative to the reference period 1961–1990. The ensemble mean of all CMIP5 ESMs project a temperature increase varying between 1 and 2 °C in the RCP 2.6 to above 5 °C for the RCP8.5, in which the warming is slightly more intense in austral winter and spring (Fig. 15.6). Furthermore, it is possible to observe a clear east–west gradient in the patterns of changes, in which the highest values lie more to the west of the region. Regarding projections of rainfall changes (Fig. 15.8), trends vary both spatially and seasonally. For the austral summer (DJF), the ensemble mean of all ESMs shows rainfall increases that vary from 0.5 mm day−1(for the RCP2.6) to 1.0 mm day−1 (for the RCP8.5), in which the highest values are located in the north/northwest of the region. During the austral fall (MAM), the model ensemble shows a rainfall increase in the north and decrease in the south part of the region in the order of 0.5 mm day−1 for RCPs 2.6, 4.5, and 6.0, while for RCP8.5 the entire region shows a rainfall decrease of 0.5 mm day−1. For the austral winter (JJA) and spring (SON), the model ensemble shows rainfall reductions between 0.1 and 1 mm day−1 for the entire region.
As an approximated indicator of temperature change uncertainty, the standard deviation for the different ESM projections used in this study is shown in Fig. 15.7 as a measure of ensemble spread. Temperature projections show larger spread over the western part of NEB; however, the standard deviation does not exceed 1 °C for almost the entire region. Regarding precipitation, the signal agreement from all models used in this study are employed as a measure of uncertainty (Fig. 15.9). In general, for all RCP scenarios, 60–80% of the models agree with rainfall increases in austral summer in the northern part of NEB, 60–80% agree with rainfall reductions in austral fall, and between 80% and 90% of the models show rainfall reductions during austral winter and spring. Therefore, both Figs. 15.7 and 15.9 show that there is some degree of uncertainty in climate change projections for NEB, but with good reliability for rainfall decreases and temperature increases during the austral fall until austral spring.
5 Climate Extremes Trends Over the Caatinga
In addition to the changes discussed earlier in this chapter, the IPCC AR5 (IPCC 2013) also projects with medium to high confidence (based on the agreement among CMIP5 models and the consistency with other physical features of climate change) the following climatic stressors over NEB:
-
Surface soils are projected to dry out;
-
Both annual evapotranspiration and runoff are projected to decrease;
-
Days and nights are projected to be warmer;
-
More frequent intense rainfall episodes followed by dry and warm periods without rain; and
-
Dry spells are projected to be longer with the possibility of droughts being triggered.
Figures 15.10 and 15.11 show some of the aforementioned climatic stressors through some climate extremes indexes computed with the CMIP5 dataset, namely: dry spells (depicted by the number of consecutive dry-days [CDD]Footnote 5), cold days (TX10pFootnote 6) and cold nights (TN10pFootnote 7), and warm days (TX90pFootnote 8) and warm nights (TN90pFootnote 9).
The CMIP5 ensemble mean projections of CDD change for three time slices (2011–2040, 2041–2070, and 2071–2100) and four RCPs, displayed as anomalies from the reference period 1961–1990, are shown in Fig. 15.10. Dry spells are projected to increase in all time slices and forcing scenarios from eight to more than 28 additional dry days, with the highest values located in the western portion of the northeast. Results generally indicate an intensification of the patterns of change with increasing radiative forcing. In this way, the largest CDD values (from 20 to more than 28 additional dry days) are observed during 2071–2100 for RCP 8.5.
In NEB , dry spells and drought events are part of the natural climate variability. These events have occurred in the past, are occurring in the present, and are likely to intensify in the future according to climate change projections (Marengo et al. 2016). Drought affects mainly vulnerable residents of the semiarid region, creating situations of water deficiency and risks to water, energy, and food security (Eakin et al. 2014). For example, the drought that intensified in 2012 and extended into 2015 is considered to be the most severe in recent decades and has had an impact on many districts in NEB, affecting almost nine million people (Marengo et al. 2013, 2016). Superimposing droughts upon pre-existing social–economic–political stresses place intense pressure on freshwater availability and quality in the region, and threaten its water, energy, and food security (e.g., Gutiérrez et al. 2014).
Regarding temperature extremes indices (Fig. 15.11), the ensemble mean of all CMIP5 ESMs shows a large tendency to decrease the number of cold nights and days and a relatively less pronounced tendency to increase the number of warm nights and days for the historical period (1901–2005), which have already been found in several observations studies in South America (e.g., IPCC 2007, 2012, 2013; Marengo et al. 2009; Rusticucci et al. 2010; Sillmann et al. 2013a, b). For the future projections (2006–2100), results generally indicate an intensification of the tendencies observed in the historical period and intensification with increasing radiative forcing. All these results are consistent with the expected changes due to increasing GHG emissions and consequently global warming.
6 Concluding Remarks
According to the latest reports of the IPCC, warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and many of the observed changes since the 1950s are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The largest contribution to these changes is attributed to the human influence in the climate system, mainly through the increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 since the 1750s.
In Brazil , several studies based on global and regional climate projections indicate that important changes in the climate are still expected to happen in this century, with major social and economic impacts on food production, commodities, and energy, and also large impact on the region’s biodiversity. The changes projected in the IPCC reports will certainly lead to a new set of risks and threats that can exacerbate existing risk situations in the country.
Among the most affected regions in Brazil, the Amazon and northeast regions appear to be large hotspots. For some modeling studies, projections of the future climate drive a savannization of parts of Amazon and desertification of the Caatinga region, with potential adverse impacts on biodiversity, supply and quality of water resources, carbon storage, and the provision of other ecosystem services. Therefore, despite the many uncertainties that remain in projections of climate change, the scientific knowledge available today is enough for decision-makers to implement mitigation and adaption measures to prevent dangerous climate change in the region.
Notes
- 1.
The ‘climate system’ consists of five major components that interact with each other: the atmosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere, lithosphere, and biosphere. The climate system changes over time because of the influence of its own internal dynamics and because of natural and anthropogenic external forcings.
- 2.
‘Land use’ refers to the total of arrangements, activities, and inputs undertaken in a certain land cover type (a set of human actions). The term ‘land use’ is also used in the sense of the social and economic purposes for which land is managed (e.g., grazing, timber extraction, and conservation). ‘Land use change’ refers to a change in the use or management of land by humans, which may lead to a change in land cover. Land cover and land use change may have an impact on the surface albedo, evapotranspiration, sources and sinks of greenhouse gases, or other properties of the climate system and may thus have a radiative forcing and/or other impacts on climate, locally or globally (Glossary of IPCC AR4 [IPCC 2007]).
- 3.
Radiative forcing is the change in the net, downward minus upward, irradiance (expressed in W m−2) at the tropopause (boundary between the troposphere and the stratosphere) due to a change in an external driver of climate change, such as, for example, a change in the concentration of carbon dioxide or the output of the Sun (Glossary of IPCC AR4 [IPCC 2007]).
- 4.
The ITCZ (intertropical convergence zone) is the area encircling the Earth near the equator which represents the junction between the southeast and the northeast trades (of the Southern and Northern Hemispheres, respectively). The ITCZ appears as a band of clouds that circle the globe near the equator.
- 5.
Consecutive Dry Days (CDD): maximum number of consecutive days when precipitation is <1 mm.
- 6.
Cold Days (TX10p): percentage of time when daily maximum temperature is less than the 10th percentile.
- 7.
Cold Nights (TN10p): percentage of time when daily minimum temperature is less than the 10th percentile.
- 8.
Warm Days (TX90p): percentage of time when daily maximum temperature is greater than the 90th percentile.
- 9.
Warm Nights (TN90p): percentage of time when daily minimum temperature is greater than the 90th percentile.
References
Annan JD, Hargreaves JC (2010) Reliability of the CMIP3 ensemble. Geophys Res Lett 37(2):1–5
Baettig MB, Wild M, Imboden DM (2007) A climate change index: where climate change may be most prominent in the 21st century. Geophys Res Lett 34(1):1–6
Barros V, Clarke R, Dias PS (2006) Climate change in the La Plata Basin. Inter American Institute on Global Change, Buenos Aires
Bidegain M, Coronel G, Ríos N, Santos B (2012) Escenarios climáticos futuros para Paraguay. Meteor-Forschung 37(2):47–55
Blázques J, Nuñez MN (2013) Analysis of uncertainties in future climate projections for South America: comparison of WCRP-CMIP3 and WCRP-CMIP5 models. Clim Dyn 41:1039–1056
Bombardi RJ, Carvalho LMV (2009) IPCC global coupled climate model simulations of the South America monsoon system. Clim Dyn 33:893–916
Boulanger JP, Martinez F, Segura EC (2006) Projection of future climate change conditions using IPCC simulations, neural networks and Bayesian statistics. Part 1: temperature mean state and seasonal cycle in South America. Clim Dyn 27:233–259
Boulanger JP, Martinez F, Segura EC (2007) Projection of future climate change conditions using IPCC simulations, neural networks and Bayesian statistics. Part 2: precipitation mean state and seasonal cycle in South America. Clim Dyn 28:255–271
Boulanger JP, Brasseur G, Carril AF, Castro M, Degallier N, Ereño C, Treut HL, Marengo JA, Menendez G, Nuñez MN, Penalba OC, Rolla AL, Rusticucci M, Terra RA (2010) A Europe-South America network for climate change assessment and impact studies. Clim Chang 98:307–329
Chou SC, Marengo JA, Lyra A, Sueiro G, Pesquero J, Alves LM, Kay G, Betts R, Chagas D, Gomes J, Bustamante J (2012) Downscaling of South America present climate driven by 4-member HadCM3 runs. Clim Dyn 38:635–653
Collins M (2007) Ensembles and probabilities: a new era in the prediction of climate change. Phil Trans R Soc A 365:1957–1970
Coutinho RM, Kraenkel RA, Prado PI (2015) Catastrophic regime shift in water reservoirs and São Paulo water supply crisis. PLoSOne 10:e0138278
Darela-Filho JP, Lapola DM, Torres RR, Lemos MC (2016) Socio-climatic hotspots in Brazil: how do changes driven by the new set of IPCC climatic projections affect their relevance for policy? Clim Chang 136:413–425
Eakin HC, Lemos MC, Nelson DR (2014) Differentiating capacities as a means to sustainable climate change adaptation. Glob Environ Chang 27:1–8
Franchito SH, Fernandez JPR, Pareja D (2014) Surrogate climate change scenario and projections with a regional climate model: impact on the aridity in South America. Am J Clim Chang 3:474–489
Giorgi F (2005) Climate change prediction. Clim Chang 73:239–265
Gutiérrez APA, Engle NL, De Nys E, Molejon C, Martins ES (2014) Drought preparedness in Brazil. Weather Clim Extremes 3:95–106
Hastenrath S, Heller L (1977) Dynamics of climate hazards in northeast Brazil. Q J R Meteorol Soc 103:77–92
Hegerl GC, Zwiers FW, Braconnot P, Gillett NP, Luo Y, Marengo JA, Nicholls N, Penner JE, Stott PA (2007) Understanding and attributing climate change. In: climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Mamming M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York
IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Mamming M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom/New York
IPCC (2012) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. A special report of working groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In: Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF, Qin D, Dokken DJ, Ebi KL, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ, Plattner G-K, Allen SK, Tignor M, Midgley PM (eds) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York, p 582
IPCC (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York
IPEA (Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada) (2011) Climate change in Brazil: economic, social and regulatory aspects. Available at http://www.ipea.gov.br/agencia/images/stories/PDFs/livros/livros/livro_climatechange.pdf. Accessed 31 Aug 2016
Joetzjer E, Douville H, Delire C, Ciais P (2013) Present-day and future Amazonian precipitation in global climate models: CMIP5 versus CMIP3. Clim Dyn 41:1–16
Jones C, Carvalho LMV (2013) Climate change in the South American Monsoon System: present climate and CMIP5 projections. J Clim 26:6660–6678
Junquas C, Vera C, Li L, Le Treut H (2012) Summer precipitation variability over southeastern South America in a global warming scenario. Clim Dyn 38:1867–1883
Knutti R (2008) Should we believe model predictions of future climate change? Phil Trans R Soc A 366:4647–4664
Knutti R, Sedlácek J (2013) Robustness and uncertainties in the new CMIP5 climate model projections. Nat Clim Chang 3:369–373
Knutti R, Furrer R, Tebaldi C, Cermak J, Meehl GA (2010) Challenges in combining projections from multiple climate models. J Clim 23:2739–2758
Kousky VE (1979) Frontal influences on Northeast Brazil. Mon Weather Rev 107:1140–1153
Kousky VE, Chu PS (1978) Fluctuations in annual rainfall for Northeast Brazil. J Meteorol Soc Jpn 56:457–465
Lapola DM, Oyama MD, Nobre CA (2009) Exploring the range of climate biome projections for tropical South America: the role of CO2 fertilization and seasonality. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 23:3
Lindoso DP, Rocha JD, Debortoli N, Parente II, Eiró F, Bursztyn M, Rodrigues-Filho S (2014) Integrated assessment of smallholder farming’s vulnerability to drought in the Brazilian semi-arid: a case study in Ceará. Clim Chang 127:93–105
Magrin GO, Marengo JA, Boulanger JP, Buckeridge MS, Castellanos E, Poveda G, Scarano FR, Vicuña S (2014) Central and South America. In: Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part B: regional aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Marengo JA, Bernasconi M (2015) Regional differences in aridity/drought conditions over Northeast Brazil: present state and future projections. Clim Chang 129:103–115
Marengo JA, Jones R, Alves LM, Valverde M (2009) Future change of temperature and precipitation extremes in South America as derived from the PRECIS regional climate modeling system. Int J Climatol 30:1–15
Marengo JA, Ambrizzi T, Rocha RP, Alves LM, Cuadra SV, Valverde M, Ferraz SET, Torres RR, Santos DC (2010a) Future change of climate in South America in the late XXI century: intercomparison of scenarios from three regional climate models. Clim Dyn 35:1073–1097
Marengo JA, Rusticucci M, Penalba O, Renom M (2010b) An intercomparison of observed and simulated extreme rainfall and temperature events during the last half of the twentieth century. Part 2: historical trends. Clim Chang 98:509–529
Marengo JA, Chou SC, Kay G, Alves LM, Pesquero JF, Soares WR, Santos DC, Lyra AA, Sueiro G, Betts R, Chagas DJ, Gomes JL, Bustamante JF, Tavares P (2012) Development of regional future climate change scenarios in South America using the Eta CPTEC/HadCM3 climate change projections: climatology and regional analyses for the Amazon, São Francisco and the Parana river Basins. Clim Dyn 38:1829–1848
Marengo JA, Alves LM, Soares WR, Rodriguez DA, Camargo H, Riveros MP, Pabló AD (2013) Two contrasting severe seasonal extremes in tropical South America in 2012: flood in Amazonia and drought in Northeast Brazil. J Clim 26:9137–9154
Marengo JA, Torres RR, Alves LM (2016) Drought in Northeast Brazil – past, present and future. Theor Appl Climatol 1:1–12
Meehl GA, Stocker TF, Collins WD, Frieslingstein P, Gaye AT, Gregory JM, Kitoh A, Knutti R, Murphy JM, Noda A, Raper SCB, Watterson G, Weaver AJ, Zhao ZC (2007) Global climate projections. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Mamming M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, /New York
Mitchell TD, Jones PD (2005) An improved method of constructing a database of monthly climate observations and associated high-resolution grids. Int J Climatol 25:693–712
Moss RH, Edmonds JA, Hibbard KA, Manning MR, Rose SK, Van Vuuren DP, Carter TR, Emori S, Kainuma M, Kram T, Meehl GA, Mitchell JFB, Nakicenovic N, Riahi K, Smith SJ, Stouffer RJ, Thomson AM, Weyant JP, Willbanks TJ (2010) The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463:747–756
Nuñez MN, Solman SA, Cabré MF (2008) Regional climate change experiments over southern South America. II: climate change scenarios in the late twenty-first century. Clim Dyn 32:1081–1095
Räisänen J (2007) How reliable are climate models? Tellus 59:2–29
Rao VB, Lima MC, Franchito SH (1993) Seasonal and interannual variations of rainfall over eastern Northeast Brazil. J Clim 6:1754–1763
Rusticucci M, Marengo JA, Penalba O, Renom M (2010) An intercomparison of observed and simulated extreme rainfall and temperature events during the last half of the twentieth century. Part 1: mean values and variability. Clim Chang 98:493–508
Salazar LF, Nobre CA, Oyama MD (2007) Climate change consequences on the biome distribution in tropical South America. Geophys Res Lett 34:9
Seth A, Rojas M, Rauscher SA (2010) CMIP3 projected changes in the annual cycle of the South American Monsoon. Clim Chang 98:331–357
Sillmann J, Kharin VV, Zhang X, Zwiers FW, Bronaugh D (2013a) Climate extremes indices in the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble: part 1. Model evaluation in the present climate. J Geophys Res 118:1–18
Sillmann J, Kharin VV, Zwiers FW, Zhang X, Bronaugh D (2013b) Climate extremes indices in the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble: part 2 future climate projections. J Geophys Res 118:2473–2493
Stott PA, Gillett NP, Hegerl GC, Karoly DJ, Stone A, Zhang X, Zwiers F (2010) Detection and attribution of climate change: a regional perspective. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 1:192–211
Strang DMGD (1972) Climatological analysis of rainfall normal in Northeast Brazil. Centro Tecnológico Aeroespacial IAE-M 02/72, São José dos Campos
Taylor KE, Stouffer RJ, Meehl GA (2012) An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 93:485–498
Tebaldi C, Knutti R (2007) The use of the multi-model ensemble in probabilistic climate projections. Phil Trans R Soc A 365:2053–2075
Torres RR, Ferreira NJ (2011) Case studies of easterly wave disturbances over Northeast Brazil using the Eta model. Weather Forecast 26:225–235
Torres RR, Marengo JA (2013) Uncertainty assessments of climate change projections over South America. Theor Appl Climatol 112:253–272
Torres RR, Marengo JA (2014) Climate change hotspots over South America: from CMIP3 to CMIP5 multi-model datasets. Theor Appl Climatol 117:579–587
Torres RR, Lapola DM, Marengo JA, Lombardo MA (2012) Socio-climatic hotspots in Brazil. Clim Chang 115:597–609
Urrutia R, Vuille M (2009) Climate change projections for the tropical Andes using a regional climate model: temperature and precipitation simulations for the end of the 21stcentury. J Geophys Res 114:D2
Van Vuuren DP, Edmonds J, Kainuma M, Riahi K, Thomson A, Hibbard K, Hurtt GC, Kram T, Krey V, Lamarque JF, Masui T, Meinshausen M, Nakicenovic N, Smith SJ, Rose SK (2011) The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Clim Chang 109:5–31
Vera C, Silvestri G (2009) Precipitation interannual variability in South America from the WCRP-CMIP3 multi-model dataset. Clim Dyn 32:1003–1014
Vera C, Silvestri G, Liebmann B, González P (2006) Climate change scenarios for seasonal precipitation in South America from IPCC-AR4 models. Geophys Res Lett 33:13
Vieira RMSP, Tomasella J, Alvala RCS, Sestini MF, Affonso AG, Rodriguez DA, Barbosa AA, Cunha APMA, Valles GF, Crepani E, de Oliveira SBP, de Souza MSB, Calil PM, de Carvalho MA, Valeriano DM, Campello FCB, Santana MO (2015) Identifying areas susceptible to desertification in the Brazilian northeast. Solid Earth 6:347–360
Yamazaki Y, Rao VB (1977) Tropical cloudiness over the South Atlantic Ocean. J Meteorol Soc Jpn 55:205–207
Acknowledgements
The research leading to these results has received funding from the Minas Gerais State Research Foundation – FAPEMIG (APQ-01088-14).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Torres, R.R., Lapola, D.M., Gamarra, N.L.R. (2017). Future Climate Change in the Caatinga. In: Silva, J.M.C., Leal, I.R., Tabarelli, M. (eds) Caatinga. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68339-3_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68339-3_15
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-68338-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-68339-3
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)