Sentences with phrase «acts as a negative feedback»

The interesting part is that more clouds in summer as well as less clouds in winter both act as negative feedbacks: less warming in summer with more clouds reflecting the sunlight and more cooling in winter from less clouds allowing more heat to escape to space.

However, sea ice then grows very rapidly, since the growth rate for thin ice is much higher than for thick ice, which acts as a negative feedback on thickness during the growth season (Bitz and Roe, 2004; Notz, 2009).

Perhaps all of this newly freed up ice - cold water at the poles is temporarily acting as a negative feedback, but as it absorbs more of the solar radiation, over time, it will transform into what we rightly think: a predominately positive feedback system, rapidly intensifying the warming.

Is TC saying that increased fertilization due to CO2 is going to act as a negative feedback of sufficient magnitude that the problem of anthropogenic emissions is smaller than generally believed?

The carbon cycle today is actually acting as a negative feedback, absorbing our fossil fuel CO2.

It's possible that CO2 contributes about a.6 C increase in temperature and that the effects of clouds acts as a negative feedback to moderate further increases.

# 27 CCPO It's possible that CO2 contributes about a.6 C increase in temperature and that the effects of clouds acts as a negative feedback to moderate further increases.

16 (DBB) If more water vapor leads to more precipitation then water vapor will act as a negative feedback on rising global temperature.

Lindzen also suggested that water vapor would act as a negative feedback on global warming because the upper troposphere would dry out as it warmed (which also fits the «sky will open up» ideas) but the fact is that the troposphere has gotten wetter.

It acts as negative feedback of a sorts.

Except perhaps that CaCO3 is a remarkably efficient solid for the purpose of cutting off sources of Ca in upwellings in oceans, acting as a negative feedback?

So long term trends act as negative feedback on CO2 levels, and therefore your physically impossible scenario is impossible indeed and has nothing to do with my writings or opinions in any way.

The adiabatic lapse rate also acts as a negative feedback by moving heat higher up into the atmosphere where it can more easily escape, which also serves to cool the surface.

If, as Willis suggests, they are acting as negative feedbacks which make a significant contribution to the stability of the climate system (and it has proved to be remarkably stable to massive changes in conditions historically) then incorreclty assuming it is a random, mean zero process will lead to incorrect conclusions.

But water vapor, unlike CO2, acts as a negative feedback mechanism, too, because as the atmosphere heats and more water vapor enters the air, we also have more clouds, which reflect heat.

I don't need to know all of the subtle characteristics and interactions in a climate model to understand that it doesn't account for water vapor forming additional clouds which act as a negative feedback on warming.

«He also * claims * clouds have negative feedback, completely neglecting studies that show clouds to have both negative and positive feedback» he does indeed state that clouds can act as a positive and negative feedback, but he claims that he believes based upon his own observations that mostly clouds act as a negative feedback, might I also say that this observation is also made by Professor.

For example one of the most significant climate forcing is cloud activity, which acts as a negative feedback.

Clearly there are other transient factors which dominate the actual radiation balance so could any of these act as negative feedbacks?

As regards the role of clouds and water vapour, Schmidt claims that Lindzen is unique in his belief that they act as a negative feedback, adding that there are now strong observational data to the contrary.»

The increased albedo from melting arctic ice should not matter very much, but the newly exposed cold surface water might absorb extra carbon dioxide, acting as a negative feedback on the whole system.

Not exact matches

Acting as a safety valve of sorts, this response creates a negative radiative feedback that allows more of the accumulating heat to be released into space through the top of the atmosphere.

But the only feedback to this article I have received to date has been negative, since it turns out the act of talking about how great manga that nobody else can get is viewed as snobbishly elitist.

Besides, I am not really sure that we would have ever considered CO2 fertilization to be a negative feedback in as much as it would have simply meant that less CO2 was building up and therefore couldn't act as a climate forcing.

The change in radiation balance is more heating of the oceans at one side (specifically high in the subtropics, as expected), but more heat released at higher altitudes, thus somewhere acting as a net negative feedback to higher sea surface temperatures.

The atmosphere and surface might very well heat up from enhanced GHE, but as soon as water vapor feedback kicks in it will actually act as both a positive and a negative feedback.

This is what I get out of it: the Arctic - ice - albedo situation is more complicated than earlier thought (due to clouds, sun - filled summers, dark winters, etc), but NET EFFECT, the ice loss and all these other related factors (some negative feedbacks) act as a positive feedback and enhance global warming.

And, as the satellite observations of Spencer and Braswell showed, as the planet warms over a period of several months, clouds act as a net negative feedback (the reflecting low - altitude clouds increase more than the absorbing high - altitude clouds with warming).

Skeptics also see CO2 as increasing water vapor, but they see this water vapor acting as a net negative feedback.

As the total cloud cover increases, the first effect acts to reduce the warming (a negative feedback) while the second effect acts to increase it (positive feedback).

Feedbacks, by the way can be negative as well, acting to reduce the warming effect.

Re: «atmospheric water vapor acts as feedback magnifier» How do you quantify and validate the global magnitude of impacts (INCLUDING CLOUDS) or even whether they are positive or negative?

If the extra GHG forcing is not accumulating in the climate system, as it seems, then the system behavior is different form what are postulating Hansen and the like and negative feedbacks are prevailing (or a negative forcing of some sort is acting).

Cloud formation not only acts as a positive feedback but as negative feedbacks as well.

This acts as what engineers call «negative feedback» and would explain the paradox of more extensive southern ocean ice in a warming world.