↓ Skip to main content

Scenario dependence of future changes in climate extremes under 1.5 °C and 2 °C global warming

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
192 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Scenario dependence of future changes in climate extremes under 1.5 °C and 2 °C global warming
Published in
Scientific Reports, April 2017
DOI 10.1038/srep46432
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhili Wang, Lei Lin, Xiaoye Zhang, Hua Zhang, Liangke Liu, Yangyang Xu

Abstract

The 2015 Paris Agreement aims to limit global warming below 2 °C and pursue efforts to even limit it to 1.5 °C relative to pre-industrial levels. Decision makers need reliable information on the impacts caused by these warming levels for climate mitigation and adaptation measures. We explore the changes in climate extremes, which are closely tied to economic losses and casualties, under 1.5 °C and 2 °C global warming and their scenario dependence using three sets of ensemble global climate model simulations. A warming of 0.5 °C (from 1.5 °C to 2 °C) leads to significant increases in temperature and precipitation extremes in most regions. However, the projected changes in climate extremes under both warming levels highly depend on the pathways of emissions scenarios, with different greenhouse gas (GHG)/aerosol forcing ratio and GHG levels. Moreover, there are multifold differences in several heavily polluted regions, among the scenarios, in the changes in precipitation extremes due to an additional 0.5 °C warming from 1.5 °C to 2 °C. Our results demonstrate that the chemical compositions of emissions scenarios, not just the total radiative forcing and resultant warming level, must be considered when assessing the impacts of global 1.5/2 °C warming.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 192 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 35 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 16%
Student > Master 17 9%
Other 14 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 37 19%
Unknown 45 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 49 26%
Environmental Science 38 20%
Engineering 12 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 6%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 54 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 December 2019.
All research outputs
#5,629,250
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#43,615
of 142,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,202
of 328,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1,356
of 4,257 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 142,961 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,307 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,257 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.