Sentences with phrase «albedo change»

The SAF differences between the models are shown to stem mainly from the sensitivity of the surface albedo to surface temperature rather from the impact of a given surface albedo change on the shortwave budget.

Another way of saying this is to estimate ECS from the last glacial - interglacial transition, the albedo change due to ice sheet melting is taken as a forcing rather than as a feedback.

Given the role of warming in albedo change and the projections of increased warming and enhanced melting, future changes in the GrIS albedo will likely result largely from warming and associated feedbacks.

Albedo change is a recognised but separate effect.

Paper: Reference: Yun Qian, William I. Gustafson Jr., L. Ruby Leung, Steven J. Ghan, Effects of soot - induced snow albedo change on snowpack and hydrological cycle in western U.S. based on WRF chemistry and regional climate simulations, Journal of Geophysical Research - Atmospheres, 2009, doi: 10.1029 / 2008JD011039

Averaged globally, this albedo change is equivalent to 25 % of the direct forcing from CO2 during the past 30 y.

We can also suppose that internal variability drives the TOA further through cloud albedo change.

I've always said that the current drop in Arctic Ice Extent might have roots in soot from the industrialization of Asia causing an albedo change which really took off in the 1990 ′ s, would show up in the summer melt season when solar irradiance is at a peak in the Arctic.

If the initial direct forcing due to orbit change is «negligible», and the feedback mechanisms (GHG increase and albedo change) «fully account for» the temperature rise, then we should see an acceleration of temperature rise as these feedbacks kick in.

It's albedo change from increased autumnal snow cover at high northern latitudes.

Once the Arctic goes, the albedo change affects the whole earth, so everyone warms up.

Being an ocean, the Arctic ice is a much less stable system because it is subject to positive feedback from the albedo change, while the Antarctic albedo can stay quite fixed, so it is not going to have this positive feedback.

In other words, if the Greenland / Antarctic surface albedo change were identified as a slow feedback, rather than as a fast - feedback snow effect as it is in figure 7, the fast - feedback sensitivity at 1 — 4 × CO2 would be approximately 4 °C.

Albedo change due to LGM — Holocene vegetation change, much of which is inherent with ice sheet area change, and albedo change due to coastline movement are lumped together with ice sheet area change in calculating the surface albedo climate forcing.

But all those glaciers, sea ice and desert / grasslands and a -6 W / m2 increase in low cloud cover (IPCC feedback estimates) do not result in Zero Albedo change.

Really the big question for me, once aware of all in http://s24.postimg.org/rbbws9o85/overview.gif and much else, is whether or not coming cooling in the 21st century will end with a somewhat brief LIA - like event, or, via amplification of cooling through further albedo change from snow cover rise then, continue far longer into a non-little Ice Age afterwards..

This leads me to believe that CO2 forcing is a minor component of the temperature rise (even Hansen in his paper «Global Warming in the 21st century, an Alternative Scenario» has assigned much warming to e.g. black carbon, methane etc, and an inquisitive mind might easily think of others such as albedo change).

How many years» data would you require before you accepted that albedo change is a more important driver than CO2?

And then you have to accept that the climate models do a very poor job of predicting CO2 - AGW because the equation introduced by Lacis and Hansen in 1974 to predict cloud albedo change from pollution is useless even though Sagan derived it.

There are other factors such as albedo change, buildings that diminish surface winds, and anthropogenic heat sources from anthing that consumes fuel or electricity to produce work and waste heat which buildings then help to trap.

The main albedo change in the last 60 years is probably ice / snow loss, which is another positive feedback to the change and not independent.

Averaged globally, this albedo change is equivalent to 25 % of the direct forcing from CO2 during the past 30 years.»

The albedo change by latitude in the paper includes «surface» and «oceans».

It is only earth's geography that turns these effects into an initial albedo change, and this is how the forcing first appears.

Both GHGs and ice albedo change are feedbacks to the initial orbital forcing.

That paper has a comparison of ice albedo change between the LGM and pre-industrial for the globe, by latitude.

It should also be noted here that approximately 20 % of the total earth energy imbalance results from the albedo change of a melting polar ice cap.

Ibid., pp. 393 — 96; Yun Qian et al., «Effects of Soot - Induced Snow Albedo Change on Snowpack and Hydrological Cycle in Western United States Based on Weather Research and Forecasting Chemistry and Regional Climate Simulations,» Journal of Geophysical Research, vol.

Also interesting that they don't understand that water vapour feedback, no matter what it's magnitude, applies equally to anything that causes a change in radiative forcing for the planet — more GH gases, Albedo change, any GCR induced changes in clouds.

Team Purple could check for UHI, albedo change, pollution etc theories to see if those, combined with the greenhouse effect, can produce predictions which actually match reality, something Red's efforts conspicuously fail to do.

Who wudda thunk that albedo change including clouds would regulate the amount of solar energy absorbed?

To date, while various effects and feedbacks constrain the certainty placed on recent and projected climate change (EG, albedo change, the response of water vapour, various future emissions scenarios etc), it is virtually certain that CO2 increases from human industry have reversed and will continue to reverse the downward trend in global temperatures that should be expected in the current phase of the Milankovitch cycle.

More surface warming than cloud - height warming is indicative of surface albedo change and / or fewer clouds and / or increase in solar «constant».

To some extent, I actually agree with Dr. Hansen on this point, additional global warming would cause an albedo change - I just disagree that CO2 would have any affect.

: besides arresting inflation by reflating Zimbabwe's gold reserves with the hefty Nobel prize medal, it can halt global warming by parlaying the award money into world - wide albedo change.

From the last glacial max — CO2 forcing had about a 2W / m2 increase and ice sheet albedo change amounted to some 25W / m2 less reflected SW..

From last glacial max the the albedo change was some 25W / m2.

The albedo change resulting from the snowline retreat on land is similarly large as the retreat of sea ice, so the combined impact could be well over 2 W / sq m. To put this in context, albedo changes in the Arctic alone could more than double the net radiative forcing resulting from the emissions caused by all people of the world, estimated by the IPCC to be 1.6 W / sq m in 2007 and 2.29 W / sq m in 2013.»

It is the orbital characteristics of Earth that is the long - term driver of climate, with NH land masses sensitive to TSI at around 65 deg N. Leading to build - up / melt of snowfield and consequent albedo change, leading to temp change.

GHGs are certainly not the only possible cause of an albedo change.

The clear sky land albedo change is a measure of UHI / land use change.

Your albedo change represents a value of about 0.17 W / m ^ 2, which if correct, would make Arctic sea ice reduction in recent years potentially a major contributor to ongoing imbalances.

Figure 1: Global albedo change 1984 — 2004.

How can they make such a claim when albedo change alone exceeds the entire change due to CO2?

All of this is reason for everyone and his brother, aunt and sister to greatly reduce their own GHG emissions, and to scream bloody murder till every corporation, institution and governmental body they have any influence over to immediately institute policies to rapidly bring down GHG emissions and look at reliable ways of drawing down atmospheric CO2 levels directly (especially replanting grasslands in the north, tree planting toward the equator where albedo change is not an issue).

Note that part of the uncertainy in all this is the time uncertainty — from the ice core records, we can pick a rather precise time and look at a rather precise number for greenhouse gas concentrations, but pinning down the magnitude albedo change at exactly the same time (since albedo is not globally uniform, obviously) is impossible.

The Arctic Ocean losing its ice is almost certainly involved in the initiation of northern thermohaline demise, so albedo change will compensate.

So albedo change (owing to changes in orbital forcing, which is what melts the ice sheets) was comparable to, and probably larger than, the CO2 change.

[Response: The albedo change, going from last glacial maximum to present (pre-industrial time) was about 3.5 + / -1 W / m ^ 2, whereas CO2 change (including other greenhouse gases) was about 2.6 + / - 0.5), and aerosols about 0.5 + / -1.

In fact, the albedo change may be completely overwhelmed by changes in evapotranspiration, sensible heat flux, etc..