Sentences with phrase «aerosols can influence»

Not exact matches

Aerosol particles influence Earth's climate through cloud formation: Clouds can only form if so - called cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) are present, which act as seeds for condensing water molecules.

These small mineral aerosols can be transported over long distances on Earth and have an influence on the climate and weather.

There they spread globally and can influence the composition of the air for many years — with far - reaching consequences for ozone chemistry, aerosol formation and climate.

Aerosols are a secondary effect so they can reinforce carbon dioxide - influenced warming or slow it down.»

Sloan and Wolfendale also discussed the results from an experiment at CERN in Switzerland called CLOUD, where researchers are looking at ways in which cosmic rays can ionize, or charge, aerosols in the atmosphere, influencing how clouds are formed.

That's the conclusion of a team of scientists using a new approach to study tiny atmospheric particles called aerosols that can influence climate by absorbing or reflecting sunlight and seeding clouds.

By studying clusters, scientists can better understand electrolytes that affect human biology, aerosols that influence climate, and chemical building blocks that could lead to breakthroughs in new materials.

Volcanoes can — and do — influence the global climate over time periods of a few years but this is achieved through the injection of sulfate aerosols into the high reaches of the atmosphere during the very large volcanic eruptions that occur sporadically each century.

These changes might influence interactions between the ocean and the atmosphere such as the air - sea gas exchange and the emission of sea - spray aerosols that can scatter solar radiation or contribute to the formation of clouds.

To think that we can understand it well enough, soon enough, to be able to manipulate it in a delicate and foresightful way under multiple influences (CO2, sufate aerosols, iron seeding of the oceans, etc) just seems like hubris to me.

But there are offsets between GHGs / aerosol combinations and solar activity (especially as derived by Hoyt and Schatten), which may have been underestimated (see Stott e.a. 2003) If one simply should compare only the influence of solar (by H&S or even LBB) with the increase in heat content of the oceans, one can get a similar conclusion: that solar is the main driving force in ocean heat content.

With halve the sensitivity for CO2 (~ 1.5 C for 2xCO2, including feedbacks), reduced influence of aerosols (1 / 4th) and increased solar sensitivity (~ 1.5 times), one can fit the temperature trend of the last century...

This paper re-states the grand Svensmark theory and attempts to address the work that has shown cosmic rays can not be a significant influence on climate because most aerosols run out of stuff to become big enough for cloud formation.

We can, to some degree, remove the influence of volcaninc aerosols just by computing 10 - point moving averages.

So Nielsen - Gammon is correct to note that some of the slowed surface temperature warming over the past decade can be attributed to La Niña, although there have been other influences at play as well, such as human aerosol emissions.

I think that the best we can say is: «None others are required to reach satisfactory agreement with the observations when significant flexibility is allowed also for the anthropogenic influences by GHG's and aerosols.»

There are much better arguments on other items where (C) AGW is on thin ice: climate models which fail on a lot of items like cloud cover, overestimate the influence of aerosols, can't cope with natural variability and therefore fail in their temperature forecasts.

So now volcanoes decide... Even if Asia will reduce «anthropogenic influences» of sulfur aerosols, nothing we gain... We can not «hope» that abruptly we have a «volcanic silence» and anthropogenic GHGs «will triumph»... An aerosol «the end» of global warming?

These include the influences of a changing climate, altered air mixing and transport rates, energy exchange, and changes in the composition of the atmosphere (e.g., water vapor, methane, nitrous oxide, aerosols, etc.), all of which can influence stratospheric ozone.

Volcanoes can — and do — influence the global climate over time periods of a few years but this is achieved through the injection of sulfate aerosols into the high reaches of the atmosphere during the very large volcanic eruptions that occur sporadically each century.

Several climate scientists will attribute more than 100 % of the warming to CO2 — they can due this if the man - made reflective aerosols and ozone are canceling out a portion of the CO2 influence.

That current models underestimate the solar influences, even within the constraints of current models (like a fixed response to aerosols) can be read here: http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/StottEtAl.pdf

While it is true that aerosols can warm and cool the climate (by absorption and reflection of solar radiation, respectively, besides influencing cloud properties), most evidence suggests that globally, cooling is dominant.

It can not be right, when providing an observationally - based estimate of ECS, to let it be influenced by including GCM - derived estimates for aerosol forcing — a key variable for which there is now substantial observational evidence.

Aerosols will also change the energy balance, and depending on the characteristics and circumstances, and secondary effects like influence on clouds, can heat or cool the planet.

However, other processes hamper its possibility to grow large enough to substantially influence the climate: Two aerosols can collide together, in a process called coagulation.