Sentences with phrase «climate feedback parameter»

The differences in total climate feedback parameter between the Cess and coupled models arise primarily from differences in clear - sky feedbacks that are anticipated from the nature of the Cess experimental design (i.e., ignoring the polar amplification and sea ice albedo feedback).

Murphy, D.M., and Forster, P.M. (2010) On the accuracy of deriving climate feedback parameters from correlations between surface temperature and outgoing radiation, Journal of Climate, 23, 4983 - 4988.

Comparison of GCM climate feedback parameters for water vapour (WV), cloud (C), surface albedo (A), lapse rate (LR) and the combined water vapour plus lapse rate (WV + LR) in units of W m — 2 °C — 1.

That is equivalent to an almost uniform prior were instead 1 / S, the climate feedback parameter (lambda), to be estimated.

New paper mixing «climate feedback parameter» with climate sensitivity... «climate feedback parameter was estimated to 5.5 ± 0.6 W m − 2 K − 1» «Another issue to be considered in future work should be that the large value of the climate feedback parameter according to this work disagrees with much of the literature on climate sensitivity (Knutti and Hegerl, 2008; Randall et al., 2007; Huber et al., 2011).

The climate feedback parameter estimated from the MMD AOGCMs ranges from about 0.7 to 2.0 W m — 2 °C — 1 (Supplementary Material, Table S8.1).

They find a climate feedback parameter of 2.3 ± 1.4 W m — 2 °C — 1, which corresponds to a 5 to 95 % ECS range of 1.0 °C to 4.1 °C if using a prior distribution that puts more emphasis on lower sensitivities as discussed above, and a wider range if the prior distribution is reformulated so that it is uniform in sensitivity (Table 9.3).

Assuming that this increased energy loss is proportional to the surface temperature change T, we can write F = λ T + Q (1) where λ is the climate feedback parameter.

The climate feedback parameter is also defined in the IPCC glossary, and equation (1) is just an algebraic transformation of the mathematical definition of the climate sensitivity parameter given there.

where ΔQ is the change in net downward TOA energy flux, ΔF is the change in forcing, ie, the change in net downward TOA energy flux that is independent of climate states, ΔT is the change in global means surface temperature, and α is the climate feedback parameter.

The method is somewhat circular, since forcing for each model is calculated each year as the product of its estimated climate feedback parameter and its simulated global warming, adjusted by the change in its radiative imbalance (heat uptake).

Each model's climate feedback parameter is derived by regressing the model's radiative imbalance response against its global temperature response over the 150 years following an abrupt quadrupling of CO2 concentration.

Accordingly, the forcing estimation method relies upon a model exhibiting a fairly linear climate response, and hence having a climate feedback parameter (and an effective climate sensitivity) that does not vary with time (in addition to having a temperature response that is proportional to forcing).

That is equivalent to an almost uniform prior were instead 1 / S, the climate feedback parameter (lambda), to be estimated.

[8] I estimate GISS - E2 - R's effective climate sensitivity applicable to the historical period as 1.9 °C and its ERF F2xCO2 as 4.5 Wm − 2, implying a climate feedback parameter of 2.37 Wm − 2 K − 1, based on a standard Gregory plot regression of (ΔF − ΔN) on ΔT for 35 years following an abrupt quadrupling of CO2 concentration.