Sentences with phrase «aerosol increases other»

Expectations of decreases in large source regions such as China [195] may be counteracted by aerosol increases other places as global population continues to increase.

Not exact matches

On the other hand, «if some volcanoes that are large enough go off and if they are the dominant cause [of increasing aerosols], then we will probably see some increases» in cooling.

While it is still possible that other factors, such as heat storage in other oceans or an increase in aerosols, have led to cooling at the Earth's surface, this research is yet another piece of evidence that strongly points to the Pacific Ocean as the reason behind a slowdown in warming.

A few of the main points of the third assessment report issued in 2001 include: An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system; emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols due to human activities continue to alter the atmosphere in ways that are expected to affect the climate; confidence in the ability of models to project future climate has increased; and there is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.

The study, published Wednesday in the journal Nature, showed that the production of tar sands and other heavy oil — thick, highly viscous crude oil that is difficult to produce — are a major source of aerosols, a component of fine particle air pollution, which can affect regional weather patterns and increase the risk of lung and heart disease.

Whilst several methods for counteracting climate change with geoengineering are considered feasible, injecting sulfates or other fine aerosols into the stratosphere, thereby increasing planetary albedo, is a leading contender.

Of the other strand, aerosol cooling, Rasool and Schneider, Science, July 1971, p 138, «Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate» is the best exemplar.

Here a reaction on the main points about the natural (solar, volcanic) vs. man - made (GHGs, aerosols) sensitivity: — If there was a larger temperature variation in the past millennium, the mathematical evidence is that an increase of one of the terms of the temperature trend equation must go at the cost of one or more other terms of the equation.

The Hadcm3 model has calculated the largest increase in temperature which may be attributed to the reduction of aerosol load (40 %) over the period 1990 - 1999 somewhere in NE Europe, other models do that more in Southern Europe.

Of the other strand, aerosol cooling, Rasool and Schneider, Science, July 1971, p 138, «Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate» is the best exemplar.

Such factors include increased greenhouse gas concentrations associated with fossil fuel burning, sulphate aerosols produced as an industrial by - product, human - induced changes in land surface properties among other things.

In other words, if we are after a cause (or causes) for the temperature increase during the period in question, the presence or absence of aerosols from volcanic eruptions is beside the point, because they can not explain any increase in temperatures that occurred prior to any cooling effect they might have had.

Here a reaction on the main points about the natural (solar, volcanic) vs. man - made (GHGs, aerosols) sensitivity: — If there was a larger temperature variation in the past millennium, the mathematical evidence is that an increase of one of the terms of the temperature trend equation must go at the cost of one or more other terms of the equation.

The increase of ocean heat content in Barnett, Pierce and Schnur 2001 is only compared to GHGs and aerosols, all other human and natural influences excluded.

But increasing CO2 provides a long - term positive forcing; other forcings (like solar early in the century, and sulfate aerosols mid centrury) are superimposed onto that.

There is the possibility that the relative importance of CO2 as a climate forcer increases as it transcends the other controllers of Earth's energy balance (some of which may be masked more in ice age studies — like uncertainties around the amount of ice age aerosol climate forcing, ice age thermohaline stability and as always insolation differences throughout the Pleistocene).

One driver of temperatures in this region is the abundance and variability of ozone, but water vapor, volcanic aerosols, and dynamical changes such as the Quasi - Biennial Oscillation (QBO) are also significant; anthropogenic increases in other greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide play a lesser but significant role in the lower stratosphere.

We know other GHGs are also increasing, for example, and aerosols and solar forcing are changing, but these seem to be absorbed in the low - frequency saw - tooth together with ocean variations.

Barrett also predicted that this increase in CO2 «should increase the temperature by 0.3 °C; this trend might be detectable by careful analysis unless it is offset by other effects, such as those of aerosols».

«since the mid 1980s a significant increase in visibility has been noted in western Europe (e.g. Doyle and Dorling, 2002), and there are strong indications that a reduction in aerosol load from anthropogenic emissions (in other words, air pollution) has been the dominant contributor to this effect, which is also referred to as «brightening».»

Serious droughts and other unusual weather since 1972 increase scientific and public concern about climate change, with cooling from aerosols suspected to be as likely as warming; journalists talk of ice age.

This study of course does not take away very different concerns related to stratospheric aerosol SRM geoengineering, like possible damage to the ozone layer [which in turn would be good news if you hate waiting for that spring tan] and the fact that allowing CO2 concentrations to keep rising presents other problems, like the necessity to never stop with the active process of SRM geoengineering, and increasing ecological damage caused by ocean acidification.

During the 1950s and 1960s, average global temperatures levelled off, as increases in aerosols from fossil fuels and other sources cooled the planet.

John Philips says: Over a longer scale, the mid-century cooling has long been ascribed to the increase in sulpher and other aerosol pollution in the post-war industrialisation, this effect later diminished due to clean air legislation.

This increase is not instantaneous as there are many other drivers likes aerosols, sun, volcanic eruptions and also the natural variability of the climatic system.

Over a longer scale, the mid-century cooling has long been ascribed to the increase in sulpher and other aerosol pollution in the post-war industrialisation, this effect later diminished due to clean air legislation.

This is an old story: Rasool and (Steve) Schneider published a paper in Science on that day noting that if human - made aerosols (small particles in the air) increased by a factor of four, other things being equal, they could cause massive global cooling.

I am guessing that this would include increases in other associated GHGs (+ ve feedback) and increases in aerosols from fuel burning -LRB-- ve feedback).

The situation we have here is that the cooling effect of man - made aerosols has declined appreciably [since 1951] as CO2 emissions and other GHGs have increased, so we would expect even greater warming, which hasn't happened.

They deny they are wrong and fail to correct their mistakes: Competent personnel would have altered the GCM models to drastically reduce CO2 feedback and increase other effects (solar, clouds, aerosol) a long time ago.

IPCC2013 SPM - 10 admitted there may be «in some models, an overestimate of the response to increasing greenhouse gas and other anthropogenic forcing (dominated by the effects of aerosols)», but retained the alarming upper limit of 4.5 º C from IPCC2007.

However, there have been proposals to mitigate climate change not by decreasing greenhouse gas emissions, but by increasing the reflection of incoming solar radiation with mirrors, aerosols (small particles), or other means.

In other words, the slowed surface warming isn't a result of a smaller global energy imbalance due to factors like increased cooling from human aerosol emissions.

Our climate model, driven mainly by increasing human - made greenhouse gases and aerosols, among other forcings, calculates that Earth is now absorbing 0.85 T 0.15 watts per square meter more energy from the Sun than it is emitting to space.

Main problem is that if you expect a huge cooling impact of aerosols, the warming effect of CO2 must be increased too and opposite the other way out.

Natural Variability Doesn't Account for Observed Temperature Increase In it's press release announcement, NASA points out that while there are other factors than greenhouse gases contributing to the amount of warming observed — changes in the sun's irradiance, oscillations of sea surface temperatures in the tropics, changes in aerosol levels in the atmosphere — these factors are not sufficient to account for the temperature increases observed since 1880.

Read more: Stanford University Aerosols Also Implicated in Glacier Melting, Changing Weather Patterns Other research examining the effects of soot on melting glaciers and changing weather pattens in South Asia has reached similar conclusions: Beyond increasing atmospheric warming, because the soot coats the surface of the snow and ice it changes the albedo of the surface, allowing it to absorb more sunlight and thereby accelerating melting.

The monotonic increase of the cleaned global temperature throughout the 20th century suggests increasing greenhouse gas forcing more - or-less consistently dominating sulfate aerosol forcing, although our technique can not exclude other mechanisms not contained in the current generation of model forcing (22).

It would imply that the CO2 forcing of near 2 W / m2 has already all been balanced by something, presumably a combination of increased aerosols, increased surface temperature, reduced other GHGs, increased clouds, increased surface albedo, and / or a weaker sun.

The identification of other, sometimes more powerful, greenhouse gases such as methane, the contributions to atmospheric carbon dioxide from other human activities such as deforestation and cement manufacture, better understanding of the temperature - changing properties of atmospheric pollution such as sulphur emissions, aerosols and their importance in the post-1940s northern hemisphere cooling: the knowledge - base was increasing year by year.

Forster et al. (2007) described four mechanisms by which volcanic forcing influences climate: RF due to aerosol — radiation interaction; differential (vertical or horizontal) heating, producing gradients and changes in circulation; interactions with other modes of circulation, such as El Niño - Southern Oscillation (ENSO); and ozone depletion with its effects on stratospheric heating, which depends on anthropogenic chlorine (stratospheric ozone would increase with a volcanic eruption under low - chlorine conditions).

These include other anthropogenic factors such as increased industrial aerosols and ozone depletion, as well as natural changes in solar radiation and volcanic aerosols, and the cycle of El Niño and La Niña events.

``... Our climate model, driven mainly by increasing human - made greenhouse gases and aerosols, among other forcings, calculates that Earth is now absorbing 0.85 ± 0.15 watts per square meter more energy from the Sun than it is emitting to space....»