PNNL

Abstract

Correspondence to editor: We agree with the editors that the assumptions behind models of all types, including integrated assessment models (IAMs), should be as transparent as possible. The editors were in error, however, when they implied that the IAM community is just “now emulating the efforts of climate researchers by instigating their own model inter-comparison projects (MIPs).” In fact, model comparisons for integrated assessment and climate models followed a remarkably similar trajectory. Early General Circulation Model (GCM) comparison efforts, evolved to the first Atmospheric Model Inter-comparison Project (AMIP), which was initiated in the early 1990s. Atmospheric models evolved to coupled atmosphere-ocean models (AOGCMs) and results from the first Coupled Model Inter-Comparison Project (CMIP1) become available about a decade later. Results of first energy model comparison exercise, conducted under the auspices of the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum, were published in 1977. A summary of the first comparison focused on climate change was published in 1993. As energy models were coupled to simple economic and climate models to form IAMs, the first comparison exercise for IAMs (EMF-14) was initiated in 1994, and IAM comparison exercises have been on-going since this time.