Keep in mind that there are many different climate models and that different models make different predictions about the future. The reason is that no model can fully represent all the complex process and feedbacks involved in the Earth system. Due to this uncertainty, we should consider all of them as possible outcomes of adding greenhouse gases.
The ability of global climate models to reproduce the observed surface temperature trends over the 20th century represents an important test of the models. While most climate models are able to reproduce the slight warming in global average surface temperature that has been measured since 1860, no model is able to correctly get the spatial patterns of temperature changes correct. In other words, the observed changes in climates at the scale of regional climate zones has not been reproduced by any climate model.
As reported in the 2007 IPCC Report, various modeling studies have suggested that a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide, or its equivalent by incorporating the effects of increases in other greenhouse gases, will rise mean global temperatures between 2.0 and 4.5°C, with a best estimate of about 3.0°C. This means that climate models used to produce the 2007 IPCC Report all have positive feedbacks with respect to changes in carbon dioxide. The IPCC report says that warming within this range is likely, which means probability >66%.
You must understand that these studies were done by doubling carbon dioxide, then letting the model run until a new equilibrium climate state was reached. In reality, the increases in greenhouse gases happen over an extended period of time and the climate system takes some time to come into equilibrium.
A big issue here is that the warming in surface temperatures tends to lag behind the increase in greenhouse gases. To a large degree, this lag is due to the large thermal inertia of the oceans -- in other words it takes a lot of energy to raise the temperature of the ocean water.
Let me try to break it down into understandable steps.
As a result of the delay induced by the oceans, some climate
scientists do not expect the Earth to warm by the full
2.0-4.5°C (3.6-8.1°F) by 2060, even though the level of CO2 is expected to have doubled by that time.
We can make several conclusions here.
The 2007 IPCC Report projects a warming of about 0.2°C per decade over the next two decades. Even if concentratrations of all greenhouse gases had been kept constant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1°C would still be expected (ocean delay). Some confidence in near-term projections can be gathered from the fact that the first IPCC report in 1990 projected a warming of global average temperature of between 0.15 and 0.30°C per decade from 1990 to 2005, which can now be compared to the observed value of 0.20°C per decade. However, the most recent warming trend seems to have ended sometime around 2005 and this was not predicted by any of the IPCC climate models.
Currently, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projects a warming of 1.1-6.4°C (2.0-11.5°F) in global average temperature by the year 2100. This estimate is based on the latest runs of what are considered to be the best global climate models AND the most accepted estimates of future emissions of greenhouse gases. Keep in mind that we are never certain of future emissions of greenhouse gases, so various emission senarios are run by modeling groups. Part of the reason for the large spread in predictions of future warming is due to uncertainty in future emissions of greenhouse gases (refer to table SPM-3 [page 13] and figure SPM-5 [page 14] in the Climate Change 2007: Summary for Policymakers). The projected range of warming for each emission senario is considered likely by the IPCC report.
The 2007 Report also claims that there is now higher confidence in projected patterns of warming and other regional-scale features, including changes in wind patterns, precipitation, and some aspects of extremes. In previous semesters, I would point out that while all climate models predict warming of the global average temperature (giving us relatively high confidence in that prediction), individual models were all over the place when you looked at regional (small spatial scale) changes in temperature and precipitation patterns (giving us low confidence in the ability of climate models to project regional climate changes). Since I do not have time to evaluate the claim that regional projections from climate models are more confident, I will have to defer to the latest IPCC report (see pages 15 and 16 in the Climate Change 2007: Summary for Policymakers). In summary, IPCC 2007 projects that warming in the 21st century will continue to show geographical patterns of warming similar to those observed over the past several decades, i.e., warming is expected to be greatest over land and at most high northern hemisphere latitudes, and least over the southern hemisphere oceans. In spite of what the IPCC 2007 report claims, climate models have major problems in reproducing the multi-decadal climate variability that is known (through observations) to take place at regional (ecosystem-level) scales. Since global scale changes can be considered as a summation and interaction of regional climate changes, many question whether current climate models are even capable of accurately predicting future climate changes.
Recall when we started this section on global warming and climate change, it was pointed out that the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events is probably more influential on the types of plants and animals that can survive in a given ecosystem than the average conditions. Therefore, any changes in the distribution of extreme events is an extremely important thing to monitor and predict.
Predicting the distribution of extreme events is a very difficult problem for climate models to answer. For one, extremes are by definition rare, which makes statistical conclusions far more difficult to draw. Another reason is that the wildest weather is often confined to areas that are smaller than global climate models can predict (typical horizontal resolution of climate models is about 150 km). In a sense this is just a re-statement of the problem mentioned above: climate model projections are more uncertain over small regional scales.
Because predicting and monitoring changes in the distribution of extreme weather events is so important to our understanding of the effects of global warming and climate change, research groups working with climate models are beginning to look at this issue. The following 10 indicies for extreme weather have been identified as target issues for climate prediction models (where available, I have added information available from the IPCC 2007 report):
Currently, we have less confidence in the ability of climate models to accurately predict the above indices as compared with predicting changes in global average temperature. Hopefully, with lots of hard work, scientists can improve climate models to better answer the important question: how will the distribution and intensity of extreme weather events change in response to human activities?