Sentences with phrase «balance estimate of sensitivity»

Not exact matches

Whether the observed solar cycle in surface temperature is as large as.17 K (as in Camp and Tung) or more like.1 K (many previous estimates) is somewhat more in doubt, as is their interpretation in terms of low thermal inertia and high climate sensitivity in energy balance models.

I think that some comment on my energy balance based climate sensitivity estimate of 1.6 - 1.7 °C (details at http://www.webcitation.org/6DNLRIeJH), which underpinned Matt Ridley's WSJ op - ed, would have been relevant and of interest.

The S&P STRIDE LDI component is designed to approximate the sensitivity of the cost of income to interest rates and inflation, so even as the account balance changes, the estimated retirement income is steady over time.

This sensitivity estimate is not the last word on the subject, because of uncertainties in the approximate formulae used to compute the terms in the energy balance, and neglect of possible effects of water vapor feedback on the surface budget.

We should underscore that the concepts of radiative forcing and climate sensitivity are simply an empirical shorthand that climatologists find useful for estimating how different changes to the planet's radiative balance will lead to eventual temperature changes.

This is an example of energy transport affecting the energy balance and a valid argument by itself that the paleo records aren't a reliable way to estimate current climate sensitivity, isn't it?

A method of dealing with the lack of mass balance measurements is to estimate the changes in mass balance as a function of climate, using mass balance sensitivities (see Box 11.2 for definition) and observed or modelled climate change for glacier covered regions.

In particular, two commonly used methods for converting cumulus condensate into precipitation can lead to drastically different climate sensitivity, as estimated here with an atmosphere — land model by increasing sea surface temperatures uniformly and examining the response in the top - of - atmosphere energy balance.

Girma, the equilibrium climate sensitivity (estimated at about 3C per CO2 doubling; or about 0.8 C per W / m ^ 2) is not related to the rate of increase, but to how far the increase goes until the Earth is back in energy balance.

No: that is the beauty of using top of atmosphere radiative balance data — it automatically reflects the flow of heat into the ocean, so thermal inertia of the oceans is irrelevant to the estimate of equilibrium climate sensitivity that it provides, unlike with virtally all other instrumental methods.

Paul, An obvious test that would be more directly informative than your estimates, would be to see if the energy balance model analysis correctly diagnoses the sensitivity of a GCM, given equivalent observations.

But that seems of little relevance to my heat balance based climate sensitivity estimate.

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.

James I very largely agree with what you say, but may I respond on some of your comments relating to my recent energy - balance based climate sensitivity estimate?

For instance, two that were based purely on global energy balance estimates, with climate sensitivity assumed to be 3 K; three did not themselves actually estimate global aerosol forcing; and one turns out to have used a model with a serious code error, correction of which substantially reduces its estimate of aerosol cooling.

«The assessment is supported additionally by a complementary analysis in which the parameters of an Earth System Model of Intermediate Complexity (EMIC) were constrained using observations of near - surface temperature and ocean heat content, as well as prior information on the magnitudes of forcings, and which concluded that GHGs have caused 0.6 °C to 1.1 °C (5 to 95 % uncertainty) warming since the mid-20th century (Huber and Knutti, 2011); an analysis by Wigley and Santer (2013), who used an energy balance model and RF and climate sensitivity estimates from AR4, and they concluded that there was about a 93 % chance that GHGs caused a warming greater than observed over the 1950 — 2005 period; and earlier detection and attribution studies assessed in the AR4 (Hegerl et al., 2007b).»

The reason why a 1 / S ^ 2 prior is noninformative is that estimates of climate sensitivity depend on comparing changes in temperature with changes in -LCB- forcing minus the Earth's net radiative balance (or its proxy, ocean heat uptake)-RCB-.

I think that some comment on my energy balance based climate sensitivity estimate of 1.6 - 1.7 °C (details at http://www.webcitation.org/6DNLRIeJH), which underpinned Matt Ridley's WSJ op - ed, would have been relevant and of interest.

From a skim through of the above post, I think it promises to help me get a far better idea of the heat balance method is used along with notional «forcings» to get an estimate of climate sensitivity that is not reliant on GCMs.

As well as this simple estimate from heat balance implying a best estimate for ECS of approximately 1.6 °C, and the reworking of the Gregory 02 results suggesting a slightly lower figure, two good quality recent observationally - constrained studies using relatively simple hemispheric - resolving models also point to climate sensitivity being about 1.6 °C:

There were two major themes that emerged across a lot of the discussions: the stability of the basic «energy balance» equation -LRB--RRB- that defines the sensitivity,, to zeroth order; and the challenge of estimating cloud feedbacks from process - based understanding.