Sentences with phrase «climates feedback cycles»

Dear RC, Is it not possible that scientists and mathematicians from the science of non linear dynamics (which maths I am presuming is being used in the maths of climate models) to shed light on the amplification and dampening of the climates feedback cycles and hence the so called «sensitivity» issue and hence the possible range of temperatures?

Not exact matches

This is an important positive feedback on the carbon cycle (the exchange of carbon compounds throughout the climate system).

So the fact that we have this very strong drying in the tropics during glaciation would argue for a strong feedback of water vapor concentration to the global climate during glacial - interglacial cycles.»

Paul Dirmeyer, a professor in the department of atmospheric, oceanic and earth sciences at George Mason University who was not involved in the study, notes: «Green et al. put forward an intriguing and exciting new idea, expanding our measures of land - atmospheric feedbacks from mainly a phenomenon of the water and energy cycles to include the biosphere, both as a response to climate forcing and a forcing to climate response.»

General circulation models have generally excluded the feedback between climate and the biosphere, using static vegetation distributions and CO2 concentrations from simple carbon - cycle models that do not include climate change6.

For this subsystem, many of the longer term feedbacks in the full climate system (such as ice sheets, vegetation response, the carbon cycle) and some of the shorter term bio-geophysical feedbacks (methane, dust and other aerosols) are explicitly excluded.

The climate sensitivity classically defined is the response of global mean temperature to a forcing once all the «fast feedbacks» have occurred (atmospheric temperatures, clouds, water vapour, winds, snow, sea ice etc.), but before any of the «slow» feedbacks have kicked in (ice sheets, vegetation, carbon cycle etc.).

Hall, A. & Qu, X. Using the current seasonal cycle to constrain the snow albedo feedback in future climate change.

(Top left) Global annual mean radiative influences (W m — 2) of LGM climate change agents, generally feedbacks in glacial - interglacial cycles, but also specified in most Atmosphere - Ocean General Circulation Model (AOGCM) simulations for the LGM.

Special attention is paid to feedbacks of physiological changes on the carbon, nitrogen, iron, and sulfur cycles and how these changes will affect and be affected by future climate change.

In the other direction, at higher temperatures there is expected to be carbon - cycle feedbacks, that will amplify the warming, so then the climate sensitivty would be higher.

Dufresne, P.M Cox, and P. Rayner, 2003: How positive is the feedback between climate change and the carbon cycle?

Friedlingstein, P., et al., 2001: Positive feedback between future climate change and the carbon cycle.

Govindasamy, B., et al., 2005: Increase of the carbon cycle feedback with climate sensitivity: results from a coupled and carbon climate and carbon cycle model.

For instance, the sensitivity only including the fast feedbacks (e.g. ignoring land ice and vegetation), or the sensitivity of a particular class of climate model (e.g. the «Charney sensitivity»), or the sensitivity of the whole system except the carbon cycle (the Earth System Sensitivity), or the transient sensitivity tied to a specific date or period of time (i.e. the Transient Climate Response (TCR) to 1 % increasing CO2 after 70 climate model (e.g. the «Charney sensitivity»), or the sensitivity of the whole system except the carbon cycle (the Earth System Sensitivity), or the transient sensitivity tied to a specific date or period of time (i.e. the Transient Climate Response (TCR) to 1 % increasing CO2 after 70 Climate Response (TCR) to 1 % increasing CO2 after 70 years).

Dufresne, J. - L., et al., 2002: On the magnitude of positive feedback between future climate change and the carbon cycle.

Despite claims to the contrary, the conclusions of the IPCC take CO2 fertilisation properly into account in the assessment of climate change feedbacks involving the carbon cycle, and in the assessment of the impacts of climate change on ecosystems.

Model performance in reproducing the observed seasonal cycle of land snow cover may provide an indirect evaluation of the simulated snow - albedo feedback under climate change.

To explore the potential importance of carbon cycle feedbacks in the climate system, explicit treatment of the carbon cycle has been introduced in a few climate AOGCMs and some Earth System Models of Intermediate Complexity (EMICs).

Consequently, an international team of researchers led by Markus Reichstein, director at the Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry in Jena, Germany, investigated the influence of extreme climate events on the carbon cycle of land ecosystems and if the resulting additional CO2 emissions feedback on climate change.

The climate sensitivity classically defined is the response of global mean temperature to a forcing once all the «fast feedbacks» have occurred (atmospheric temperatures, clouds, water vapour, winds, snow, sea ice etc.), but before any of the «slow» feedbacks have kicked in (ice sheets, vegetation, carbon cycle etc.).

There had to have been feedbacks that moved the global climate much further in the direction of warming than it would have gone just from the Milankovitch cycles.

Climate - Carbon Cycle Feedback Analysis: Results from the C4MIP Model Intercomparison.

Proposed explanations for the discrepancy include ocean — atmosphere coupling that is too weak in models, insufficient energy cascades from smaller to larger spatial and temporal scales, or that global climate models do not consider slow climate feedbacks related to the carbon cycle or interactions between ice sheets and climate.

Further research will be required to investigate if this fluctuation carries features of projected future climate change and the CO2 growth rate anomaly has been a first indicator of a developing positive feedback between climate warming and the global carbon cycle.

General circulation models have generally excluded the feedback between climate and the biosphere, using static vegetation distributions and CO2 concentrations from simple carbon - cycle models that do not include climate change6.

Climate responses are highly likely to be non-linear, and many of the possible feedbacks are strongly positive (that's a vicious cycle, for those allergic to slightly technical language.)

I am interested in the lags in the climate system and to see how the limit cycles may respond to minor amounts of positive feedback, such as that due to CO2 outgassing with temperature.

Although the primary driver of glacial — interglacial cycles lies in the seasonal and latitudinal distribution of incoming solar energy driven by changes in the geometry of the Earth's orbit around the Sun («orbital forcing»), reconstructions and simulations together show that the full magnitude of glacial — interglacial temperature and ice volume changes can not be explained without accounting for changes in atmospheric CO2 content and the associated climate feedbacks.

For this subsystem, many of the longer term feedbacks in the full climate system (such as ice sheets, vegetation response, the carbon cycle) and some of the shorter term bio-geophysical feedbacks (methane, dust and other aerosols) are explicitly excluded.

Polar amplication is of global concern due to the potential effects of future warming on ice sheet stability and, therefore, global sea level (see Sections 5.6.1, 5.8.1 and Chapter 13) and carbon cycle feedbacks such as those linked with permafrost melting (see Chapter 6)... The magnitude of polar amplification depends on the relative strength and duration of different climate feedbacks, which determine the transient and equilibrium response to external forcings.

The research article has the title Strong carbon cycle feedbacks in a climate model with interactive CO2 and sulphate aerosols and appeared in Geophys.

al. of the Hadley Centre Impact of Climate - Carbon Cycle Feedbacks on Emission Scenarios....

Aslo, regarding climate sensitivity a very key thing to remember, especially if sensitivity turns out to be on the high side, is that the «final» equilibrium temperature (Alexi's concerns about there being such a thing aside) calculated from climate sensitivity does not take into account carbon cycle feedbacks OR ice sheet changes.

«Positive feedbacks (self - reinforcing cycles) within the climate system have the potential to accelerate human - induced climate change,» says a section from that Climate Science Special report, «and even shift the Earth's climate system, in part or in whole, into new states that are very different from those experienced in the recent past.climate system have the potential to accelerate human - induced climate change,» says a section from that Climate Science Special report, «and even shift the Earth's climate system, in part or in whole, into new states that are very different from those experienced in the recent past.climate change,» says a section from that Climate Science Special report, «and even shift the Earth's climate system, in part or in whole, into new states that are very different from those experienced in the recent past.Climate Science Special report, «and even shift the Earth's climate system, in part or in whole, into new states that are very different from those experienced in the recent past.climate system, in part or in whole, into new states that are very different from those experienced in the recent past.»

This paper is nonetheless interesting for the link that they make to the carbon cycle and the potential for feedbacks that may amplify the CO2 concentration in the future that will depend on the warming, and hence on climate sensitivity.

«This graph gives you an idea of what the Anthropocene climate looks like as... without even taking into account the possibility of carbon cycle feedbacks leading to a release of stored terrestrial carbon.»

Starting from an old equilbrium, a change in radiative forcing results in a radiative imbalance, which results in energy accumulation or depletion, which causes a temperature response that approahes equilibrium when the remaining imbalance approaches zero — thus the equilibrium climatic response, in the global - time average (for a time period long enough to characterize the climatic state, including externally imposed cycles (day, year) and internal variability), causes an opposite change in radiative fluxes (via Planck function)(plus convective fluxes, etc, where they occur) equal in magnitude to the sum of the (externally) imposed forcing plus any «forcings» caused by non-Planck feedbacks (in particular, climate - dependent changes in optical properties, + etc.).)

How come when it comes to «feedback in climate» no bugger knows what it means, but when it comes to «feedback in the rabits / foxes cycle» or «feedback as in my mic is next to the loudspeaker for the mic», everyone knows it?

Note that this figure illustrates the uncertainties arising from different greenhouse gas scenarios and climate models, but almost certainly underestimates the uncertainty associated with carbon - cycle feedbacks.»

To explore the potential importance of carbon cycle feedbacks in the climate system, explicit treatment of the carbon cycle has been introduced in a few climate AOGCMs and some Earth System Models of Intermediate Complexity (EMICs).

The carbon cycle feedback is potentially important to 21st century climate projections, but is not conventionally included in the climate sensitivity as it is not a fast feedback.

It specifically states that climate sensitivity does not conventionally include carbon cycle feedback as it is «not a fast feedback.»

As such, even in the case of the carbon cycle, it would appear that WG1 AR4 deviated very little if at all from fast feedback Charney climate sensitivity.

You underscore a problem: accounting for «slow» feedbacks suppose that a climate model or a carbon cycle model run for centuries.

Friedlingstein, P., Meinshausen, M., Arora, V.K., Jones, C.D., Anav, A., Liddicoat, S.K., and Knutti, R., 2014: Uncertainties in cmip5 climate projections due to carbon cycle feedbacks.

«How Strong Is Carbon Cycle - Climate Feedback under Global Warming?»

For instance, perfect initialization of the state of the Atlantic ocean, a correct simulation of the next 10 years of the solar cycle, a proper inclusion of stratospheric water vapor, etc may be important for whether the next 5 years are warmer than the previous 5, but it has nothing to do with climate sensitivity, water vapor feedback, or other issues.

The amplitudes of the pre-industrial, decadal - scale NH temperature changes from the proxy - based reconstructions (< 1 °C) are broadly consistent with the ice core CO2 record and understanding of the strength of the carbon cycle - climate feedback.

We are simply running out of time to stop all of the carbon cycle feedbacks from intensifying and to stop these devastating, record - breaking wildfires from becoming the normal climate.