Sentences with phrase «about greenhouse gas concentrations»

Not exact matches

About half of this near - term warming represents a «commitment» to future climate change arising from the inertia of the climate system response to current atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases.

«The bottom line is that while the future is inherently uncertain, we know enough about rising greenhouse gas concentrations and their potential impact on the drying of the Amazon to warrant big reductions in greenhouse gases, to reduce the possibility that we'll have a very serious impact on the world's biggest rainforest,» Lewis said.

«The rise at the end of the Ice Age and today is about the same [a rise of 100 ppm] and we're going to be well above and beyond,» most likely increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases by hundreds of parts per million from preindustrial levels, Shakun notes.

Non-polar glacial ice holds a wealth of information about past changes in climate, the environment and especially atmospheric composition, such as variations in temperature, atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases and emissions of natural aerosols or human - made pollutants... The glaciers therefore hold the memory of former climates and help to predict future environmental changes.

[NASA's OCO - 2 Mission in Pictures (Gallery)-RSB- The concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide — a heat - trapping «greenhouse gas» — has risen from 280 parts per million (ppm) before the Industrial Revolution to about 400 ppm today.

Even if the concentrations of all greenhouse gases and aerosols had been kept constant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1 °C per decade would be expected.

... The Earth's atmospheric methane concentration has increased by about 150 % since 1750, and it accounts for 20 % of the total radiative forcing from all of the long - lived and globally mixed greenhouse gases (these gases don't include water vapor which is by far the largest component of the greenhouse effect).

First, there is still a lot of uncertainty about the extent and pace of warming from a particular rise in concentrations of greenhouse gases, and about how fast and far seas will rise as a result.

By the way, I'd just like to mention that I am far happier to be arguing about the comparative benefits of nuclear power, wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, conservation, efficiency, reforestation, organic agriculture, etc. for quickly reducing CO2 emissions and concentrations, than to be engaged in yet another argument with someone who doesn't believe that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, or that human activities are not causing warming, or that the Earth is cooling, or thinks that AGW is a «liberal» conspiracy to destroy capitalism, etc..

Despite the report's added emphasis on a list of «reasons for concern» about the continuing growth of long - lived emissions that trap heat, senior White House officials said Friday and Saturday that it remained impossible to define a «dangerous» threshold in the concentration of greenhouse gases or resulting warming.

Of course, if you're serious about stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, achieving the American goal in 2020 is just step one in what would have to be a centurylong 12 - step (or more) program to completely decouple global energy use from processes that generate heat - trapping emissions.

Even if the concentrations of all greenhouse gases and aerosols had been kept constant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1 °C per decade would be expected.

In any case, in reading these arguments, I find it hard to believe that anyone who cares about GLOBAL greenhouse gas emissions / concentrations could cheer the law, and — if so — I'd have to ask why?

In the climate debate, that's why persistent calls for those who care about stabilizing the concentration of greenhouse gases to pick a number, whether 350.org's favorite or Joe Romm's, are in my view a waste of time.

Most discussions about adapting to inevitable climate change in a world with rising concentrations of greenhouse gases have focused on seawalls, drought - resistant crops and the like.

Based on results from large ensemble simulations with the Community Earth System Model, we show that internal variability alone leads to a prediction uncertainty of about two decades, while scenario uncertainty between the strong (Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5) and medium (RCP4.5) forcing scenarios [possible paths for greenhouse gas emissions] adds at least another 5 years.

This is about twice the radiative forcing today from all anthropogenic greenhouse gases today, or (again according to Modtran) it would translate to an equivalent CO2 at today's methane concentration of about 750 ppm.

A doubling of the concentration of long - lived greenhouse gases (which is projected to occur early in the next century) would, if nothing else changed, reduce the rate at which the planet can shed energy to space by about 2 %.

If greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere were to stabilize in 2100 at levels projected in the B1 and A1B emission scenarios, a further increase in global average temperature of about 0.5 °C would still be expected around 2200.

According tot he Cato Institute, the event summarizes «what is known about the science and economics surrounding greenhouse gas concentrations and abatement.

Simulations of future climate are all based upon assumptions about future greenhouse gas concentrations and other factors that influence climate; this is one reason why these simulations are referred to as «projections» rather than «predictions.»

Aristides Patrinos, Ph.D., president of Synthetic Genomics, stated that current energy - related carbon emissions total eight billion tons per year, about half of which remains in the atmosphere contributing to increasing greenhouse gas concentrations.

2) IPCC: «Even if the concentrations of all greenhouse gases and aerosols had been kept constant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1 °C per decade would be expected.»

To suggest that because near surface temperatures have flattened at or near the highest on record requires «abandoning» a sinking ship is to be grossly underinformed about the full scope and scale of the multiple changes going on and the confidence that anthropogenic climate continues unabated as it will so long as humans continue to increase greenhouse gas concentrations.

While CO2 is indeed a greenhouse gas, increasing concentrations of which may be expected to have (other things being equal) a warming effect, scientists disagree about how large that effect may be (this is particularly affected by ignorance of the effect of clouds).

How about this one, ««Polar amplification» usually refers to greater climate change near the pole compared to the rest of the hemisphere or globe in response to a change in global climate forcing, such as the concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs) or solar output (see e.g. Moritz et al 2002).

«However, an important detail about our study is that we assumed the most extreme climate change scenario in which the concentration of greenhouse gases keeps increasing throughout the 21st century.»

When it is found that the CO2 concentration growth rate has been found to be greater than the business as usual case (scenario A of Hansen et al, 1988) of about 1.5 ppm per year for the 1990s, the lolwat has moved away from CO2 to other greenhouse gases.

Released on Tuesday, it coincides with the publication of an international study on Monday, from a team led by CSIRO's Cai Wenju, which has predicted that extreme La Nina events forming in the Pacific will increase from about one in 23 years to one every 13 years because of rising greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere.

Based on current knowledge, however, it appears that achieving a high probability of limiting global average temperature rise to 2C will require that the increase in greenhouse - gas concentrations as well as all the other warming and cooling influences on global climate in the year 2100, as compared with 1750, should add up to a net warming no greater than what would be associated with a CO2 concentration of about 400 parts per million (ppm).

The late twentieth century warming was about equally influenced by increasing concentration of atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs) and a positive phase of the AMO.

... Drawdown is the point in time when greenhouse gas concentrations peak in the atmosphere and begin to go down on a year - to - year basis... I hadn't thought about solutions much until I saw the wedges, in 2001.

Even if the concentrations of all greenhouse gases and aerosols had been kept constant at 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1 °C per decade would be expected.

Even if the concentrations of all greenhouse gases and aerosols had been kept constant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1 °C per decade would be expected» (AR4 WG1 SPM p12)

Even if the concentrations of all greenhouse gases and aerosols had been kept constant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1 °C per decade would be expected» (p12)

Similarly, the climate scenarios were based on 2xCO2 equilibrium GCM projections from three models, where the radiative forcing of climate was interpreted as the combined concentrations of CO2 (555 ppm) and other greenhouse gases (contributing about 15 % of the change in forcing) equivalent to a doubling of CO2, assumed to occur in about 2060.

Among its findings, the assessment said that increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere would «contribute to additional Arctic warming of about 4 - 7C (7 - 13F), about twice the global average, over the next 100 years».

So it is natural for us to read «Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations» as being a statement about the proportion of observed degree C temp increase caused by humans.

Firstly, we know more about how rising temperatures will reduce the effectiveness of carbon sinks: the science now tells us that for any given level of emissions, concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and temperatures will increase by more than the RCEP report anticipated.

The World Meteorological Organization's Annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin raised serious concerns about a new high average global concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

The fourth assessment report of the IPCC had this to say about the monsoon: «It is likely that warming associated with increasing greenhouse gas concentrations will cause an increase of Asian summer monsoon precipitation variability.

Presenting such alternative figures confuses and undermines the public understanding of the actual science, which is an understanding about the driving mechanisms of sea level rise: thermal expansion of ocean water, melting of mountain glaciers and complex dynamics of large ice sheets — in correspondence again with projected temperature rise, that is in turn a product of projected rises of greenhouse gas concentrations using calculated estimates of climate sensitivity, together creating a net disturbance in Earth's energy balance, the very root cause of anthropogenic climate change.

Even with ongoing questions about the proxy data, the IPCC's key statement — that most of the warming since the mid-twentieth century is «very likely» to be due to human - caused increases in greenhouse - gas concentration — remains solid because it rests on multiple lines of evidence from different teams examining many aspects of the climate system, says Susan Solomon, the former co-chair of the IPCC team that produced the 2007 physical science report and a climate researcher with the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Boulder, Colorado.

Uncertainty about the forcings calculated with observed values for greenhouse gas concentrations, solar insolation, and the SOI is small relative to the uncertainty about observations for anthropogenic sulfur emissions.

«The late twentieth century warming was about equally influenced by increasing concentration of atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs) and a positive phase of the AMO [Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation].»

Public discussions about the natural greenhouse effect and climate sensitivity to rising CO2 concentrations often indicate a misunderstanding of the roles of long lived greenhouse gases (LLGHGs) relative to those of water vapour and cloud feedbacks within the climate system.

The national debate over what to do, if anything, about the increasing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has become less a debate about scientific or economic issues than an exercise in political theater.

The LGM radiative forcing from the reduced atmospheric concentrations of well - mixed greenhouse gases is likely to have been about — 2.8 W m — 2 (see Figure 6.5).

Changes in greenhouse gas concentrations may account for about half of the simulated tropical cooling (Shin et al., 2003), and for the production of colder and saltier water found at depth in the Southern Ocean (Liu et al., 2005).

And as Judith Curry points out about the current climate, there are many problems with the claim that «more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together» — far from speaking for itself, the statement needs unpacking and its premises interrogating.