Sentences with phrase «expected warming range»

«The conclusion was that the lower end of the expected warming range was smaller than we thought before.

Not exact matches

As might be expected, young Americans between 18 - 29 expressed warmer feelings towards Muslims than older Americans and also rated each group in a tighter range from 54 — 66.

On the high end, recent work suggests that 4 feet is plausible.23, 3,6,7,8 In the context of risk - based analysis, some decision makers may wish to use a wider range of scenarios, from 8 inches to 6.6 feet by 2100.10,2 In particular, the high end of these scenarios may be useful for decision makers with a low tolerance for risk (see Figure 2.26 on global sea level rise).10, 2 Although scientists can not yet assign likelihood to any particular scenario, in general, higher emissions scenarios that lead to more warming would be expected to lead to higher amounts of sea level rise.

Kilpatrick explained that the effects of climate change are expected to be seen at the edges of species» geographic ranges, as species adapted to warm climates move further north and cold - adapted species retreat from the southern parts of their ranges.

For instance, the greatest negative effects of warming are expected to occur in the tropics because tropical species tend to have a narrower range of thermal tolerance when compared with higher latitude species.

But since climate scientists already expect a wide range of negative consequences from rising temperatures, including higher sea level, more weather extremes and increasing risks to human health, anything that accelerates warming is a concern.

The paper's lead author describes his findings thus — «Recent observations suggest the expected rate of warming in response to rising greenhouse gas levels, or «Transient Climate Response,» is likely to lie within the range of current climate models, but not at the high end of this range.

M2009 use a range of climate sensitivities to compute a probability distribution function for expected warming, and then McKibben [255] selects the carbon emission limit that keeps 80 % of the probability distribution below 2 °C.

All 162 guestrooms at the hotel provide all the comforts and conveniences guests would expect in a hotel in this class.The guestrooms are equipped with non smoking rooms, bathrobes, desk, television.Guests staying at this Koh Phi Phi (Krabi) accommodation can enjoy a wide range of hotel facilities such as coffee shop, poolside bar, room service.Hotel's guests can experience on - site latest leisure and sports facilities such as water sports (non-motorized), garden, gym.The hotel provides a warm and welcoming service of international standard.Phi Phi Island Cabana Hotel Koh Phi Phi (Krabi)

Pieter Tans of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration stressed the persistent uncertainty in the range of warming expected from a buildup of greenhouse gases as cutting against the idea of specific thresholds: «Our biggest science problem is that we do not know how strong the climate feedbacks are, or even whether we know all of the ones that are important on decadal and longer time scales,» he said in an e-mail.

Pressing the frontiers of climate science and related research is vital, but it's wishful thinking to expect further science to substantially narrow uncertainties on time scales that matter when it comes to regional or short - term climate forecasting, the range of possible warming from a big buildup of carbon dioxide, the impact of greenhouse forcing on rare extremes and the like.

The IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report shows a range of figures for effective climate sensitivity — the amount of warming that can be expected from a doubling of carbon dioxide levels.

The report offers likely ranges and best estimates of the equilibrium warming that can be expected from various levels of CO2 in the atmosphere:

His position: • No evidence of increasing lake clarity as a result of secchi measurements since 1946 • The interplay of stratification and plankton productivity are not «straightforward» • Challenges O'Reilly's assumption on the correlation of wind and productivity - the highest production is on the end of the lake with the lowest winds • A strong caution using diatoms as the productivity proxy (it is one of two different lake modes) • No ability to link climate change to productivity changes • More productivity from river than allowed for in Nature Geopscience article • Externally derived nutrients control productivity for a quarter of the year • Strong indications of overfishing • No evidence of a climate and fishery production link • The current productivity of the lake is within the expected range • Doesn't challenge recent temp increase but cites temperature records do not show a temperature rise in the last century • Phytoplankton chlorophylla seems to have not materially changed from the 1970s to 1990s • Disputes O'Reilly's and Verbug's claims of increased warming and decreased productivity • Rejects Verburgs contention that changes in phytoplankton biomass (biovolume), in dissolved silica and in transparency support the idea of declining productivity.

«Even with just a further 3C of warming — well within the range to which the UN climate science panel expects temperatures to rise by the end of the century — nearly one - fifth of the planet's 720 world heritage sites will affected as ice sheets melt and warming oceans expand.»

The surface warming is also consistent with the many physical indicators, and the observed amount of warming is consistent with the expected range of climate sensitivity, which itself is based upon many different lines of evidence.

A wider range of functional forms to describe emission pathways would be expected to reduce the strength of the relationship between 2050 emissions and peak warming.

The BEST team also found that the observed warming is consistent with an equilibrium climate sensitivity of 3.1 ± 0.3 °C for CO2 doubling, in line with the IPCC climate sensitivity range, and demonstrates once again that contrary to the persistent claims of Richard Lindzen, the Earth has warmed as much as we expect given a relatively high climate sensitivity.

In those regions, cereal grain yields are projected to decline under climate change scenarios, across the full range of expected warming... Thus, countries with the lowest incomes may be the hardest hit.»

The rather heated debates we have had about the likely economic and social damage of carbon emissions have been based on that idea that there is something like a scientific consensus about the range of warming we can expect.

The world has been warming for a century, and this warming is beyond any cyclical variation we have seen over the last 1000 or more years, and beyond the range of what we might expect from natural climate variations.

The new report, for example, slightly reduces the lower end of the estimated uncertainty range for the amount of warming scientists expect in response to a doubling of CO2 concentrations compared to preindustrial levels.

M2009 use a range of climate sensitivities to compute a probability distribution function for expected warming, and then McKibben [255] selects the carbon emission limit that keeps 80 % of the probability distribution below 2 °C.

About twice as much warming (0.2 °C per decade) would be expected if emissions are within the range of the SRES scenarios.

Our analysis shows that the national contributions to date, with no further progress post-pledge period, result in expected warming in 2100 of 3.3 °C (with a range of uncertainty of 1.9 — 4.4 °C).

This forecast also suggests global temperatures over the next five years are likely to be well within, or even in the upper half, of the range of warming expected by the CMIP5 models, as used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

While a range of factors can contribute to warmer seawater, both the frequency and severity of these bleaching events is expected to increase in line with global temperatures, as the ocean absorbs much of the extra heat.

Kate: In a business - as - usual scenario, what range of warming can we expect within the lifetimes of today's young people — so to about 2070 or 2080?

So you need to look at a wide range of indicators all of which have independent sources of error (for instance, errors in satellites are not likely to be correlated with errors in weather stations or ocean buoys) and see if your understanding matches all of the different aspects that you expect from the theory (stratospheric cooling, ocean warming, Arctic melt, poleward and upward expansion of biomes etc...).

The INDCs in the Paris Agreement, assuming no further progress with the pledges, would put the world on track for a global temperature increase of 3.5 °C (6.3 °F) above pre-industrial levels, with a range of uncertainty from 2.1 to 4.7 °C (3.7 to 8.4 °F), down from the 4.5 °C (8.1 °F) of warming expected if nations continue business - as - usual.

Other expected effects of global warming include changes in agricultural yields, modifications of trade routes, glacier retreat, mass species extinctions and increases in the ranges of disease vectors.

Climate Interactive's «Ratchet Success» scenario yields expected warming by 2100 of 1.8 °C (3.2 °F), with a range of uncertainty from 0.9 to 2.4 °C (1.7 to 4.4 °F).

This new reference scenario would have 4.2 °C (7.6 °F) of expected warming globally by the year 2100 (with an uncertainty range of 2.5 °C — 5.5 °C).

She even computes the uncertainty in that trend estimate (using fancy statistics), and uses that to compute what's called a «95 % confidence interval» for the trend — the range in which we expect the true warming rate is 95 % likely to be; it can be thought of as the «plausible range» for the warming rate.

to limit warming (from preindustrial) to 2 K, we can add about 130 Gt C to the atmosphere, which might correspond to 259 Gt C of emissions, give or take (324 Gt C or 216 Gt C, for airborne fraction of 40 % or 60 %, respectively (numbers chosen for illustrative purposes; I'm not saying that is the range to expect).

... The equilibrium global average warming expected if carbon dioxide concentrations were to be sustained at 550 ppm is likely to be in the range 2 - 4.5 °C above pre-industrial values, with a best estimate of about 3 °C.»

As the range would include only the 66 % of ensemble members that passed goodness - of - fit test, I would expect it to remain largely unchanged with ensemble size, assuming a close link between goodness - of - fit and forecast warming.

The new report lowered the bottom end of the range of potential warming that could be expected to occur over the long term if the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere were to double, reversing a decision that the panel made in the last report and restoring a scientific consensus that had prevailed from 1979 to 2007.

Given the extended duration of the warming trend, the expected (and observed) variations in the rate of increase and the range of uncertainties in the temperature measurements and forecasts, a decade's worth of mild interruption is too small a deviation to prove a break in the pattern, climatologists say.

Even if the link between goodness - of - fit and forecast warming is weak, I would expect only random fluctuations in the «likely» range.

Shorting was the only way to make money on: «For the next two decades a warming of about 0.2 C per decade is expected for a range of emission scenarios.»