Sentences with phrase «by averaging climate sensitivity»

My question is whether this number is substantially different when arrived at by averaging climate sensitivity over a 3D surface or calculating climate sensitivity for a 1D average surface.

Not exact matches

This new research takes away the lower end of climate sensitivity estimates, meaning that global average temperatures will increase by 3 °C to 5 °C with a doubling of carbon dioxide.»

The addition says many climate models typically look at short term, rapid factors when calculating the Earth's climate sensitivity, which is defined as the average global temperature increase brought about by a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere.

CONCLUSION The values for the global climate sensitivity published by the IPCC cover a range from 2.1 ̊C — 4.4 ̊C with an average value of 3.2 ̊C, which is seven times larger than that predicted here.

Using the IPCC climate sensitivity of 3.2 C, the CO2 level by 2100 would need to double by 2100, from today's 392 to 784 ppmv, to reach this warming (the high side IPCC «scenario and storyline» A2 is at this level, with estimated warming of 3.4 C above the 1980 - 1999 average, or ~ 3.2 C above today's temperature).

If we have the climate sensitivity right and AVERAGE temperatures increase by the amount predicted it is not a case of your temperatures going up by that much.

The fact that the CMIP simulations ensemble mean can reproduce the 1970 — 2010 US SW temperature increase without inclusion of the AMO (the AMO is treated as an intrinsic natural climate vari - ability that is averaged out by taking an ensemble mean of individual simulations) suggests that the CMIP5 models» predicted US SW temperature sensitivity to the GHG has been significantly (by about a factor of two) overestimated.

«The fact that the CMIP simulations ensemble mean can reproduce the 1970 — 2010 US SW temperature increase without inclusion of the AMO (the AMO is treated as an intrinsic natural climate variability that is averaged out by taking an ensemble mean of individual simulations) suggests that the CMIP5 models» predicted US SW temperature sensitivity to the GHG has been significantly (by about a factor of two) overestimated.»

By the way Kramm has recently shown that if the climate sensitivity to 2x CO2 is as small as your value then it can not be discerned within the error of calculating any average annual temperature and if something can't be observed then I wonder about its existence

AR5 (as Nic Lewis regularly points out) concludes a most likely net aerosol offset of -0.9 watt / M ^ 2, which is bizarrely inconsistent with the average level of aerosol offsets used by the AR5 climate model ensemble (much higher offsets in the models), and most consistent with a fairly low (< 2C per doubling) climate sensitivity to forcing.

MAGICC gives the average of the GCM used by the IPCC, and assumes a 3 C equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS).

Most of these sensitivities are a good 40 % below the average climate sensitivity of the models used by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate sensitivity of the models used by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Change (IPCC).

The average fast - feedback climate sensitivity over the LGM — Holocene range of climate states can be assessed by comparing estimated global temperature change and climate forcing change between those two climate states [3,86].

The results by Hargreaves et al. (2007) indicate that the LGM sensitivity is on average about 15 % smaller than for 2 x CO2 climate (see their Fig. 5), and we therefore use a best guess of 0.85 and a standard deviation of 0.2 for the scaling factor.»

We have two new entries to the long (and growing) list of papers appearing the in recent scientific literature that argue that the earth's climate sensitivity — the ultimate rise in the earth's average surface temperature from a doubling of the atmospheric carbon dioxide content — is close to 2 °C, or near the low end of the range of possible values presented by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate sensitivity — the ultimate rise in the earth's average surface temperature from a doubling of the atmospheric carbon dioxide content — is close to 2 °C, or near the low end of the range of possible values presented by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Change (IPCC).

That science suggests the equilibrium climate sensitivity probably lies between 1.5 °C and 2.5 °C (with an average value of 2.0 °C), while the climate models used by the IPCC have climate sensitivities which range from 2.1 °C to 4.7 °C with an average value of 3.2 °C.

Loehle estimated the equilibrium climate sensitivity from his transient calculation based on the average transient: equilibrium ratio projected by the collection of climate models used in the IPCC's most recent Assessment Report.

To make the IPCC projections of the evolution of the earth's average temperature better reflect the latest scientific estimates of the climate sensitivity, it is necessary to adjust them downward by about 30 % at the low end, about 50 % at the high end, and about 40 % in the middle.

«Despite a wide range of climate sensitivity (i.e. the amount of surface temperature increase due to a change in radiative forcing, such as an increase of CO2) exhibited by the models, they all yield a global average temperature change very similar to that observed over the past century.

Climate sensitivity, being essentially determined by the long - term average over the attractor of a chaotic system which we don't understand very well, is essentially an example of the second case.