That increased atmospheric water vapor will also affect cloud cover, though impacts of changes in cloud
cover on climate sensitivity are much more uncertain.
Not exact matches
Climate sensitivity depends on a number of properties of the earth's climate system, such as the composition of clouds and cloud
Climate sensitivity depends
on a number of properties of the earth's
climate system, such as the composition of clouds and cloud
climate system, such as the composition of clouds and cloud
cover.
Based
on many studies
covering a wide range of regions and crops, negative impacts of
climate change
on crop yields have been more common than positive impacts (high confidence)... Since AR4, several periods of rapid food and cereal price increases following
climate extremes in key producing regions indicate a
sensitivity of current markets to
climate extremes among other factors (medium confidence).
What about the feedbacks that are not normally well represented by ECS and normally fall into the Earth System
Climate Sensitivity, stuff like the Arctic Ice
cover, which now has trends over decades closer to what was seen
on centuries in paleoclimate:
I haven't seen anything that very strongly supports the IRIS idea, but I do concur with one idea buried in the paper: that the parameterization of fractional cloud
cover in GCM's is not based
on very clear physical principles, and could operate in many different ways — some of which, I think, could make
climate sensitivity considerably greater than the midrange model of the current crop.
Well it depends
on whether you are talking about
Climate Sensitivity (Charney sensitivity... which is modelled) or Earth System Sensitivity (where things like ice sheet extent, vegetation cover etc are regarded as able to respond quickly t
Sensitivity (Charney
sensitivity... which is modelled) or Earth System Sensitivity (where things like ice sheet extent, vegetation cover etc are regarded as able to respond quickly t
sensitivity... which is modelled) or Earth System
Sensitivity (where things like ice sheet extent, vegetation cover etc are regarded as able to respond quickly t
Sensitivity (where things like ice sheet extent, vegetation
cover etc are regarded as able to respond quickly to warming).
This «
climate sensitivity» not only depends
on the direct effect of the GHGs themselves, but also
on natural «
climate feedback» mechanisms, particularly those due to clouds, water vapour, and snow
cover.
On the question of hurricanes, the theoretical arguments that more energy and water vapor in the atmosphere should lead to stronger storms are really sound (after all, storm intensity increases going from pole toward equator), but determining precisely how human influences (so including GHGs [greenhouse gases] and aerosols, and land
cover change) should be changing hurricanes in a system where there are natural external (solar and volcanoes) and internal (e.g., ENSO, NAO [El Nino - Southern Oscillation, North Atlantic Oscillation]-RRB- influences is quite problematic — our
climate models are just not good enough yet to carry out the types of
sensitivity tests that have been done using limited area hurricane models run for relatively short times.