Sentences with phrase «land and ocean means»

On the other hand, the CO2 in the land and ocean means there's less CO2 in the air, by half.

Not exact matches

It's an emergency surgical intervention meant to undo damage caused by human activity both in the oceans and on dry land, and it has been shown to work — bringing dead reef sections back from the edge in just a few years.

@islamistheanswer, Sure, while the poster seems to think that «parting» means the Big Bang, to me it seems silly to think that the Big Bang would come after heaven and already exist and likely was just and rationalization of where land came from, i.e. splitting the oceans from the sky.

«If we don't rapidly transition off of fossil fuels, the resulting climate catastrophe means mass extinctions, the collapse of ocean and land ecosystems, and flooding of the world's cities and bread - basket deltas,» Hawkins said.

That means studying changes in the Pliocene atmosphere, the land surface and most of all the oceans, which absorb the bulk of planetary warming.

But farming inefficiencies mean that most of this nitrogen runs off the land into rivers and oceans.

Ultimately, the group focused its investigation on the five strategies that appear to hold the most promise: reducing emissions, sequestering carbon through biological means on land and in the ocean, storing carbon dioxide in a liquefied form in underground geological formations and wells, increasing Earth's cloud cover and solar reflection.

A slowdown disappears La Niñas also mean that more rain falls over land and less falls over the ocean, particularly in the Pacific, Cazenave explained.

Global mean temperatures averaged over land and ocean surfaces, from three different estimates, each of which has been independently adjusted for various homogeneity issues, are consistent within uncertainty estimates over the period 1901 to 2005 and show similar rates of increase in recent decades.

CESM is a fully - coupled Earth System model, meaning all components of the Earth (atmosphere, land, ocean and cryosphere) «talk» to each other in the model.

Note that the values are the mean changes of SAT over land, and SST over ocean.

The mean and median of the equilibrium land - ocean warming contrast (using a slab ocean) in the GCMs considered is ~ 1.3 (with a spread of about 1.2 - 1.5).

ECS is defined in terms of global mean temperature change, not separately for land and ocean.

The residual errors around the best fit (posterior mean) appear somewhat non-Gaussian, but this appears to be due to the land and ocean data not centering on the same ECS value.

Also they use a 5 × 5 ° grid for the oceans (or SSTs and Shakun et al 2011) and 2 × 2 ° grid for the land, and because of more data in the oceans, the global mean is probably too biased toward the ocean.

That in turn means all the land ice will have nothing to stop it from sliding into the ocean and raising sea levels more than 10 feet.

First, what meaning can be derived from the difference between land and ocean anomalies?

The locations are often remote and inaccessible; not meant to be visited by land — the signs indicating the presence of the submarine cables face the ocean, unreadable by casual visitors strolling on the beach or hiking along the cliffs.

Lou Grinzo (12)-- I am under the impression that HadCRUTv3 uses air temperatures on land and sea surface temperatures in the oceans to produce their global mean.

Partly this has to do with changes in ocean circulation taking warmer water deeper and partly as the result of the southern hemisphere having less land mass and more ocean — where the ocean has a higher thermal inertia, meaning that it takes longer for those waters to warm.

Given that you comment that the largest differences between the different forcings is between land and ocean or between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, have you looked at the land — ocean temperature difference or the Northern — Southern Hemisphere temperature difference, as they both scale linearly with ECS, in the same way as global mean temperature for ghg forcing, but not for aerosol forcing.

First I calculated the land - only, ocean - only and global mean temperatures and MSU - LT values for 5 ensemble members, then I looked at the trends in each of these timeseries and calculated the ratios.

This result is a combination of land data, using stations where the only measurements recorded are those of the maximum and minimum daily temperature, and ocean data which are probably much more representative of the true daily mean.

«The average global temperature anomaly for combined land and ocean surfaces for July (based on preliminary data) was 1.1 degrees F (0.6 degrees C) above the 1880 - 2004 long - term mean.

Vertical land movements such as resulting from glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA), tectonics, subsidence and sedimentation influence local sea level measurements but do not alter ocean water volume; nonetheless, they affect global mean sea level through their alteration of the shape and hence the volume of the ocean basins containing the water.

The graphs on the right show the mean carbon uptake by land and ocean for each latitude line corresponding with the adjacent maps.

On decadal and longer time scales, global mean sea level change results from two major processes, mostly related to recent climate change, that alter the volume of water in the global ocean: i) thermal expansion (Section 5.5.3), and ii) the exchange of water between oceans and other reservoirs (glaciers and ice caps, ice sheets, other land water reservoirs - including through anthropogenic change in land hydrology, and the atmosphere; Section 5.5.5).

Most of the [deep] ocean is uber cold and retains very little heat.The oceans and land are in radiative balance, that means the energy they get goes back out to space over 24 hours [at the equator].

By comparing modelled and observed changes in such indices, which include the global mean surface temperature, the land - ocean temperature contrast, the temperature contrast between the NH and SH, the mean magnitude of the annual cycle in temperature over land and the mean meridional temperature gradient in the NH mid-latitudes, Braganza et al. (2004) estimate that anthropogenic forcing accounts for almost all of the warming observed between 1946 and 1995 whereas warming between 1896 and 1945 is explained by a combination of anthropogenic and natural forcing and internal variability.

Let us therefore compare satellite data (UAH6.0) with surface data (GISTEMP Land / Ocean) measured for the Southern Hemisphere (SH), from 1979 till 2015: You hopefully see like me a good correlation between the two, shown by both linear estimates and 60 month running means.

«This study examines variability in zonal mean surface - observed upper - level (combined midlevel and high - level) and low - level cloud cover over land during 1971 — 1996 and over ocean during 1952 — 1997.

The difference in annual mean and 5 - year mean global land - ocean temperature using ERSST v4 and v3b.

The decadal mean planetary energy imbalance, 0.75 W / m2, includes heat storage in the deeper ocean and energy used to melt ice and warm the air and land.

Since then there are a number of papers published on why the warming was statistically insignificant including a recent one by Richardson et al. 2016 which tries to explain that the models were projecting a global tas (temperature air surface) but the actual observations are a combination of tas (land) and SST oceans, meaning projected warming shouldn't be as much as projected.

Many agricultural regions warm at a rate that is faster than the global mean surface temperature (including oceans) but slower than the mean land surface temperature, leading to regional warming that exceeds 0.5 °C between the +1.5 and +2.0 °C Worlds.

Monthly averages of global mean surface temperature (GMST) include natural variability, and they are influenced by the differing heat capacities of the oceans and land masses.

The evolution of global mean surface temperatures, zonal means and fields of sea surface temperatures, land surface temperatures, precipitation, outgoing longwave radiation, vertically integrated diabatic heating and divergence of atmospheric energy transports, and ocean heat content in the Pacific is documented using correlation and regression analysis.

The fact that global warming has been happening «naturally» since the end of the last ice age means that it is happening spontaneously completely independent of the need for that warming to be caused by the sun heating the oceans (and land of course).

The fact this is seemingly not fully recognized — or here integrated — by Curry goes to the same reason Curry does not recognize why the so called «pause» is a fiction, why the «slowing» of the «rate» of increase in average ambient global land and ocean surface air temperatures over a shorter term period from the larger spike beyond the longer term mean of the 90s is also meaningless in terms of the basic issue, and why the average ambient increase in global air temperatures over such a short term is by far the least important empirical indicia of the issue.

From the paper: «The results also 1) reveal a significant level of coupling between ocean and land temperatures that remains even after the effects of ENSO and volcanic eruptions have been removed; 2) serve to highlight the improvements in the quality of the time series of global - mean land temperatures with the increase in the areal coverage of the station network from 1951 onward; and 3) yield a residual time series in which the signature of anthropogenically induced global warming is more prominent.»

To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global trend from slightly negative / stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands» temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters» temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).

This means the KT97 and variations is junk science, because it has excluded the real heating mechanism of Earth's land and oceans.

The standard deviation of the monthly MSU 2R anomalies has a much more zonally symmetric structure (Fig. 4 and Fig. 5) so that relative to the surface there is a much larger contribution from the northern oceans and a generally smaller contribution over land and near the equator to the hemispheric and global means.

The greater thermal inertia of the Ocean means that temperature anomalies and extremes are lower than those seen on land.

results for global and tropical domains, the extratropics of both hemispheres, departures from the zonal mean, and land - and ocean - only domains

This suggests three levels of skepticism even in Muller's mind: a) global warming which in the context means the land temperature record (not the ocean heat as Pielke Sr would prefer) b) its human causes (where Judith Curry also parts company with Muller) and c) what can and should be done about b).

As oceans warm more slowly, an average of 4 °C means warming of 5 - 6 °C on land, and even higher closer to the poles.

Furthermore, the zonal means over land and ocean considered above are representative of much of the small differences in warming ratio.

The land surface is laterally structured with widely differing albedo, and vertically structured so that it intercepts the vertically structured ocean and atmospheric reservoirs at different heights, hence different local mean temperatures.

Consistent with the global transfer of excess heat from the atmosphere to the ocean, and the difference between warming over land and ocean, there is some discontinuity between the plotted means of the lower atmosphere and the upper ocean.