Sentences with phrase «expected change their concentration»

Of course, many molecules are expected change their concentration over the critical period, and many of them could be just going along for the ride without playing a role in critical period closure.

Not exact matches

In the Central Hardwoods, the effects of a changing climate are expected to include rising temperatures due to a rise in greenhouse gas concentrations, leading to longer growing seasons.

Because the two species have had about the same amount of time to rack up changes to their lipid profiles, the investigators expected them to have roughly the same number of species - specific lipid concentrations, explains computational biologist and study leader Kasia Bozek of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany.

The meal - related changes in plasma insulin and glucose concentrations were as expected, as shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6, respectively.

The jaunty angles on the sound system's control pad seem to demand a little more concentration than you'd normally expect when changing stations or selecting from the radio / phone / CD buttons.

In this crisis situation we can expect further changes in ownership, more mergers and evidence of market concentration.

Question 3: If the change in PV = nRT due to the change in CO2 / O2 concentration IS small, negative or negligible, then wouldn't you expect the change in temperature to also be small or negligible?

With the warming already committed in the climate system plus the additional warming expected from rising concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the Arctic will experience significant changes during this century even if greenhouse gas emissions are stabilized globally at a level lower than today's.

Similarly, the logarithmic nature of the radiative forcing does have a theoretical basis, but strictly speaking, is only a good approximation that is valid for a relatively narrow range of CO2 concentrations (although the range is broad enough to encompass what you'd expect to see for our present day climate change).

This finding is consistent with the expected effect of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations and with other observed evidence of a changing climate such as reductions in Arctic sea ice extent, melting permafrost, rising sea levels, and increases in heavy downpours and heat waves.

Unless it has changed a lot very recently, basic economics tells us that a relatively free, largely unregulated marketplace can not be expected to consider all key factors or lead to outcomes that are responsible with respect to all key factors (for example, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide) unless those factors are represented in costs and correspondingly in prices.

The feedback effect is mentioned only in a comment on the expected change in the atmospheric constitution assuming that the CO2 concentration is increased, but the numbers are given for the present atmosphere, not for the hypothetical modified one.

Intuitively, it might be expected that the precipitation of calcium carbonate would decrease solution pCO2 and dissolution of calcium carbonate would increase pCO2 because total dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) concentrations and total alkalinity (TA) change in this manner.

The change to the 12C: 13C isotope ratio of atmospheric CO2 is in the direction expected if the recent increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration were caused by the anthropogenic emission of CO2.

Richard S Courtney (00:08:00): The change to the 12C: 13C isotope ratio of atmospheric CO2 is in the direction expected if the recent increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration were caused by the anthropogenic emission of CO2.

Although this century kicked off with the hottest decade on record, 2010 was the hottest year and in 2011 the Arctic may have broken both the summer and the winter melting record, there has still been heat missing: the rise in global temperatures is smaller than what one would expect from the rise in greenhouse gas concentrations, which — despite UNFCCC attempts to tackle climate change since Kyoto 1997 and Copenhagen 2009 — has even accelerated.

For instance, US Senator James Imhofe of Kansas called climate change «the greatest hoax ever» (Johnson, 2011) To claim that climate change science is the greatest hoax ever is at minimum, if not a lie, reckless disregard for the truth given the number of prestigious scientific organizations that have publicly supported the consensus view, the undeniable science supporting the conclusion that if greenhouse gases increase in the atmosphere some warming should be expected, the clear link between rising greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere and increases in fossil fuel use around the world, as well undeniable increases in warming being that have been experienced at the global scale.

He also concluded correctly that little is to be expected based on the foreseen changes in CO2 - concentration.

Nothing, right... except when you consider that the radiative forcing due to doubling of the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide is only about 3.7 W / m ², and that's expected to change the average surface temperature by about 3 °C, eventually ³.

As for the spectral measurements, I would expect there to be changes owing to changing CO2 concentrations.

Put simply, the temperature change from a CO2 concentration increase from 200 to 300ppm is different (in fact, larger) than the temperature change we might expect from a concentration increase of 600 to 700 ppm.

The answer to that question can be found in two more questions, 1) to what extent do we expect increased CO2 concentrations to change the climate?

The Mercer paper also states that the expected temperature increase due to the doubling of CO2 concentrations would, according to climate models, yield a temperature change of +10 °C for the region.

Although projected increases in greenhouse gas concentrations caused by fossil fuel combustion are expected to dominate 21st century climate change, some studies suggest that anthropogenic land use may yet be at least as important and may remain so in the near future (8).

Most of the chapter is about radiative forcing from changes in human GHG concentrations, as could be expected.

These changes have the potential to alter the concentrations of inorganic C species expected through the mixing of freshwater and seawater in estuaries, thereby affecting pH in coastal water (Aufdenkampe et al. 2011).

Over the next decade, changes in climate are expected to be due to a combination of anthropogenic changes in atmospheric greenhouse - gas and aerosol concentrations; natural variations in volcanic and solar activity, and natural, unforced internal variability.

And these severe weather events are exactly the kind of thing we'd expect to see as rising concentrations of greenhouse gases change our climate — which means that the current food price surge may be just the beginning.

This would then lead to large, unpredictable changes in ocean ecosystem structure and productivity, on top of other large unpredictable changes to be expected from ocean acidification, the other great oceanic consequence of high atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations from fossil fuel burning.

(trouble is 35 is for carbon dioxide concentration, and 65 is for forcing, so if that's the calculation it was indeed a typo in a spreadsheet) Actually CO2 as a percentage of all radiative forcing would be: 43/65 * 100 = 66 % You messed up the link (I think) so that it actually leads back to this page rather than the FAQ section http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/02/whats-wrong-with-warm-weather.html Never mind, as you know, I don't think the costs imposed by that change are large, not as long as sea level rise is only 50 cm over a hundred years (and the midpoint for the scenarios I consider most policy relevant, ie those excluding lots of coal burning after 2050, is somewhat lower still) and the change in «weather extremes» largely amounts to nothing more than what would be expected from moving south a few hundred kilometres.

The IPCC defines climate sensitivity as equilibrium temperature change ΔTλin response to all anthropogenic - era radiativeforcings and consequent «temperature feedbacks» — further changes in TS that occur because TS has already changed in response to a forcing — arising in response to the doubling of pre-industrial CO2 concentration (expected later this century).

As discussed earlier, climate sensitivity generally refers to the expected reaction of global temperatures to a arbitrary change in atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Its current dust output is essentially transport - limited, but with expected changes in future atmospheric circulation in response to increasing greenhouse gas concentrations, changes to deflation in the Bodélé may impose critical changes on the behavior of the Earth system in response to the role that dust plays in the biosphere and the sheer quantity emitted from this key region.