It is likely that an increase will continue in the future... it appears plausible that an increased amount of CO2 in the atmosphere can contribute to a gradual warming of the lower atmosphere,
especially at high latitudes».
This result is in complete contradiction to greenhouse theory, which predicts strong warming,
especially at high latitudes.
Past actual stastistics, which I have shown, tell us it is likely that increased CO2 plus slightly higher temperatures,
especially at higher latitudes, COULD be BENEFICIAL (rather than harmful) to plant growth and overall crop yields.
Not exact matches
This is
especially true for lakes
at high latitudes that are covered in ice each winter but may see less ice as temperatures rise.
The Earth's natural orbital cycles [precession] were driving a simultaneous natural cooling trend,
especially at high northern
latitudes.
Global models for the 21st century find an increased variability of precipitation minus evaporation [P - E] in most of the world,
especially near the equator and
at high latitudes [125].
Many folk,
especially those who live inland or
at higher latitudes, will tend to be deficient in three key nutrients.
It's also one of the nutrients that many people are deficient in,
especially those that live
at higher latitudes and receive less sun (since sun exposure is your best source of Vitamin D).
I was thinking instead perhaps more easily controlled polar - orbit satellites might be used, which would rotate with some fixed ratio to their orbital period, casting greater shadows
at higher latitudes... or some other arrangment... for a targetted offset polar amplification of AGW
especially and in particular perhaps avoiding the reduction in precipitation that can be caused by SW - radiation - based «GE» (although aerosols that actually absorb some SW in the troposphere while shielding the surface would have the worst effect in that way, I'd think)... strategic distribution of solar shading has been suggested with precipitation effects in mind, such as here... sorry, I don't have the link (I'm sure I saved it, just as Steve Fish would suggest — but where?).
Of course, in such a time average, each location's fluxes (energy, and also momentum and mass) are balanced, with vertical imbalances (generally a net gain in heat
at lower
latitudes and net loss in
higher latitudes,
especially in winter) are balanced by horizontal fluxes.
The troposphere is not everywhere
at all times locally vertically coupled by convection; in particular,
at night and
at high latitudes,
especially in winter, and where there is warm air advection aloft, some layer of air can become stable to localized convection.
(1) p228 Recently observed moderate climatic changes have induced forest productivity gains globally (reviewed in Boisvenue and Running, 2006) and possibly enhanced carbon sequestration,
especially in tropical forests (Baker et al., 2004; Lewis et al., 2004a, 2004b; Malhi and Phillips, 2004; Phillips et al., 2004), where these are not reduced by water limitations (e.g., Boisvenue and Running, 2006) or offset by deforestation or novel fire regimes (Nepstad et al., 1999, 2004; Alencar et al., 2006) or by hotter and drier summers
at mid - and
high latitudes (Angert et al., 2005)
Clouds exist
at all
latitudes,
especially in the tropics over the ocean, where the sun rays are most direct and intense; ice and snow only exist
at higher latitudes, where the incoming solar radiation is less intense.
Rapid ice drift is an important factor in regional ice conditions,
especially redistribution of multiyear ice into areas with
high melt rates
at low
latitudes.
At high latitudes the upwelling brings air rich in the heavy molecular constituents N2 and O2 to
high altitudes and the circulation carries this molecular - rich air to midlatitudes,
especially in the summer hemisphere, where the mean meridional circulation is already equatorward.
The SHA model for hmF2 improves the fit to the observed data with respect to IRI prediction,
especially at high and low
latitudes and they may reduce the deviations by 23 % and 40 %, respectively, compared to the deviations of the IRI prediction (Magdaleno et al. 2011).
'' BillD says: August 20, 2010
at 3:37 am Warming is strongest
at high latitudes,
especially the arctic.
Here it is shown that the precession of perihelion occurring over a century substantially affects the intra-annual variation of solar radiation influx
at different locations,
especially higher latitudes, with northern and southern hemispheres being subject to contrasting insolation changes.
Global models for the 21st century find an increased variability of precipitation minus evaporation [P - E] in most of the world,
especially near the equator and
at high latitudes [125].
GISS assumes that the correlation of temperature change is fairly strong for stations separated by up to 1,200 kilometers,
especially at middle and
high latitudes.
«However recent Arctic warming presents two problems not present in the US case: firstly the station network in the
high Arctic is sparse, and secondly the Arctic has been warming rapidly
at the same time that the boreal mid
latitudes have shown a cooling trend,
especially over eastern Russia (Cohen et al., 2012), illustrated in Figure (U5).
This is largely because melting sea ice changes the albedo of
high latitude oceans, and to a lesser extent because an inversion prevails
at high latitudes,
especially in winter, whereas
at low
latitudes the heating is convectively mixed througout the troposphere.
The scheme was based on the finding that the correlation of temperature change was reasonably strong for stations separated by up to 1200 km,
especially at middle and
high latitudes.
That 1.1 C is the IPCC low end «sensitivity» estimate which isn't a scary number
at all and in fact is a great number because if that's all it is then the slight warming, mostly in the winter in the
higher latitudes, is a great boon to agriculture
especially when the biological effect of
higher CO2 on green plant growth rates and water consumption is taken into consideration.