Sentences with phrase «forcing effect of clouds»

This will tend to enhance the greenhouse effect, though the situation is complicated by the difficulty in both projecting changes in cloud formation and determining the radiative forcing effect of clouds.

I was interested not so much in the forcing effect of clouds themselves so much as the change in albedo which might result from a change in the overall extent of global cloud cover.

In effect he is saying that it is almost impossible to differentiate the forcing effect of cloud cover from the feedback effect — and without being able to do this you can not quantify the feedback sensitvity of the climate using cloud cover data.

In effect he is saying that it is almost impossible to differentiate the forcing effect of cloud cover from the feedback effect» ===============

Not exact matches

g (acceleration due to gravity) G (gravitational constant) G star G1.9 +0.3 gabbro Gabor, Dennis (1900 — 1979) Gabriel's Horn Gacrux (Gamma Crucis) gadolinium Gagarin, Yuri Alexeyevich (1934 — 1968) Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center GAIA Gaia Hypothesis galactic anticenter galactic bulge galactic center Galactic Club galactic coordinates galactic disk galactic empire galactic equator galactic habitable zone galactic halo galactic magnetic field galactic noise galactic plane galactic rotation galactose Galatea GALAXIES galaxy galaxy cannibalism galaxy classification galaxy formation galaxy interaction galaxy merger Galaxy, The Galaxy satellite series Gale Crater Galen (c. AD 129 — c. 216) galena GALEX (Galaxy Evolution Explorer) Galilean satellites Galilean telescope Galileo (Galilei, Galileo)(1564 — 1642) Galileo (spacecraft) Galileo Europa Mission (GEM) Galileo satellite navigation system gall gall bladder Galle, Johann Gottfried (1812 — 1910) gallic acid gallium gallon gallstone Galois, Évariste (1811 — 1832) Galois theory Galton, Francis (1822 — 1911) Galvani, Luigi (1737 — 1798) galvanizing galvanometer game game theory GAMES AND PUZZLES gamete gametophyte Gamma (Soviet orbiting telescope) Gamma Cassiopeiae Gamma Cassiopeiae star gamma function gamma globulin gamma rays Gamma Velorum gamma - ray burst gamma - ray satellites Gamow, George (1904 — 1968) ganglion gangrene Ganswindt, Hermann (1856 — 1934) Ganymede «garbage theory», of the origin of life Gardner, Martin (1914 — 2010) Garneau, Marc (1949 ---RRB- garnet Garnet Star (Mu Cephei) Garnet Star Nebula (IC 1396) garnierite Garriott, Owen K. (1930 ---RRB- Garuda gas gas chromatography gas constant gas giant gas laws gas - bounded nebula gaseous nebula gaseous propellant gaseous - propellant rocket engine gasoline Gaspra (minor planet 951) Gassendi, Pierre (1592 — 1655) gastric juice gastrin gastrocnemius gastroenteritis gastrointestinal tract gastropod gastrulation Gatewood, George D. (1940 ---RRB- Gauer - Henry reflex gauge boson gauge theory gauss (unit) Gauss, Carl Friedrich (1777 — 1855) Gaussian distribution Gay - Lussac, Joseph Louis (1778 — 1850) GCOM (Global Change Observing Mission) Geber (c. 720 — 815) gegenschein Geiger, Hans Wilhelm (1882 — 1945) Geiger - Müller counter Giessler tube gel gelatin Gelfond's theorem Gell - Mann, Murray (1929 ---RRB- GEM «gemination,» of martian canals Geminga Gemini (constellation) Gemini Observatory Gemini Project Gemini - Titan II gemstone gene gene expression gene mapping gene pool gene therapy gene transfer General Catalogue of Variable Stars (GCVS) general precession general theory of relativity generation ship generator Genesis (inflatable orbiting module) Genesis (sample return probe) genetic code genetic counseling genetic disorder genetic drift genetic engineering genetic marker genetic material genetic pool genetic recombination genetics GENETICS AND HEREDITY Geneva Extrasolar Planet Search Program genome genome, interstellar transmission of genotype gentian violet genus geoboard geode geodesic geodesy geodesy satellites geodetic precession Geographos (minor planet 1620) geography GEOGRAPHY Geo - IK geologic time geology GEOLOGY AND PLANETARY SCIENCE geomagnetic field geomagnetic storm geometric mean geometric sequence geometry GEOMETRY geometry puzzles geophysics GEOS (Geodetic Earth Orbiting Satellite) Geosat geostationary orbit geosynchronous orbit geosynchronous / geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) geosyncline Geotail (satellite) geotropism germ germ cells Germain, Sophie (1776 — 1831) German Rocket Society germanium germination Gesner, Konrad von (1516 — 1565) gestation Get Off the Earth puzzle Gettier problem geyser g - force GFO (Geosat Follow - On) GFZ - 1 (GeoForschungsZentrum) ghost crater Ghost Head Nebula (NGC 2080) ghost image Ghost of Jupiter (NGC 3242) Giacconi, Riccardo (1931 ---RRB- Giacobini - Zinner, Comet (Comet 21P /) Giaever, Ivar (1929 ---RRB- giant branch Giant Magellan Telescope giant molecular cloud giant planet giant star Giant's Causeway Giauque, William Francis (1895 — 1982) gibberellins Gibbs, Josiah Willard (1839 — 1903) Gibbs free energy Gibson, Edward G. (1936 ---RRB- Gilbert, William (1544 — 1603) gilbert (unit) Gilbreath's conjecture gilding gill gill (unit) Gilruth, Robert R. (1913 — 2000) gilsonite gimbal Ginga ginkgo Giotto (ESA Halley probe) GIRD (Gruppa Isutcheniya Reaktivnovo Dvisheniya) girder glacial drift glacial groove glacier gland Glaser, Donald Arthur (1926 — 2013) Glashow, Sheldon (1932 ---RRB- glass GLAST (Gamma - ray Large Area Space Telescope) Glauber, Johann Rudolf (1607 — 1670) glaucoma glauconite Glenn, John Herschel, Jr. (1921 ---RRB- Glenn Research Center Glennan, T (homas) Keith (1905 — 1995) glenoid cavity glia glial cell glider Gliese 229B Gliese 581 Gliese 67 (HD 10307, HIP 7918) Gliese 710 (HD 168442, HIP 89825) Gliese 86 Gliese 876 Gliese Catalogue glioma glissette glitch Global Astrometric Interferometer for Astrophysics (GAIA) Global Oscillation Network Group (GONG) Globalstar globe Globigerina globular cluster globular proteins globule globulin globus pallidus GLOMR (Global Low Orbiting Message Relay) GLONASS (Global Navigation Satellite System) glossopharyngeal nerve Gloster E. 28/39 glottis glow - worm glucagon glucocorticoid glucose glucoside gluon Glushko, Valentin Petrovitch (1908 — 1989) glutamic acid glutamine gluten gluteus maximus glycerol glycine glycogen glycol glycolysis glycoprotein glycosidic bond glycosuria glyoxysome GMS (Geosynchronous Meteorological Satellite) GMT (Greenwich Mean Time) Gnathostomata gneiss Go Go, No - go goblet cell GOCE (Gravity field and steady - state Ocean Circulation Explorer) God Goddard, Robert Hutchings (1882 — 1945) Goddard Institute for Space Studies Goddard Space Flight Center Gödel, Kurt (1906 — 1978) Gödel universe Godwin, Francis (1562 — 1633) GOES (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite) goethite goiter gold Gold, Thomas (1920 — 2004) Goldbach conjecture golden ratio (phi) Goldin, Daniel Saul (1940 ---RRB- gold - leaf electroscope Goldstone Tracking Facility Golgi, Camillo (1844 — 1926) Golgi apparatus Golomb, Solomon W. (1932 — 2016) golygon GOMS (Geostationary Operational Meteorological Satellite) gonad gonadotrophin - releasing hormone gonadotrophins Gondwanaland Gonets goniatite goniometer gonorrhea Goodricke, John (1764 — 1786) googol Gordian Knot Gordon, Richard Francis, Jr. (1929 — 2017) Gore, John Ellard (1845 — 1910) gorge gorilla Gorizont Gott loop Goudsmit, Samuel Abraham (1902 — 1978) Gould, Benjamin Apthorp (1824 — 1896) Gould, Stephen Jay (1941 — 2002) Gould Belt gout governor GPS (Global Positioning System) Graaf, Regnier de (1641 — 1673) Graafian follicle GRAB graben GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) graceful graph gradient Graham, Ronald (1935 ---RRB- Graham, Thomas (1805 — 1869) Graham's law of diffusion Graham's number GRAIL (Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory) grain (cereal) grain (unit) gram gram - atom Gramme, Zénobe Théophile (1826 — 1901) gramophone Gram's stain Gran Telescopio Canarias (GTC) Granat Grand Tour grand unified theory (GUT) Grandfather Paradox Granit, Ragnar Arthur (1900 — 1991) granite granulation granule granulocyte graph graph theory graphene graphite GRAPHS AND GRAPH THEORY graptolite grass grassland gravel graveyard orbit gravimeter gravimetric analysis Gravitational Biology Facility gravitational collapse gravitational constant (G) gravitational instability gravitational lens gravitational life gravitational lock gravitational microlensing GRAVITATIONAL PHYSICS gravitational slingshot effect gravitational waves graviton gravity gravity gradient gravity gradient stabilization Gravity Probe A Gravity Probe B gravity - assist gray (Gy) gray goo gray matter grazing - incidence telescope Great Annihilator Great Attractor great circle Great Comets Great Hercules Cluster (M13, NGC 6205) Great Monad Great Observatories Great Red Spot Great Rift (in Milky Way) Great Rift Valley Great Square of Pegasus Great Wall greater omentum greatest elongation Green, George (1793 — 1841) Green, Nathaniel E. Green, Thomas Hill (1836 — 1882) green algae Green Bank Green Bank conference (1961) Green Bank Telescope green flash greenhouse effect greenhouse gases Green's theorem Greg, Percy (1836 — 1889) Gregorian calendar Grelling's paradox Griffith, George (1857 — 1906) Griffith Observatory Grignard, François Auguste Victor (1871 — 1935) Grignard reagent grike Grimaldi, Francesco Maria (1618 — 1663) Grissom, Virgil (1926 — 1967) grit gritstone Groom Lake Groombridge 34 Groombridge Catalogue gross ground, electrical ground state ground - track group group theory GROUPS AND GROUP THEORY growing season growth growth hormone growth hormone - releasing hormone growth plate Grudge, Project Gruithuisen, Franz von Paula (1774 — 1852) Grus (constellation) Grus Quartet (NGC 7552, NGC 7582, NGC 7590, and NGC 7599) GSLV (Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle) g - suit G - type asteroid Guericke, Otto von (1602 — 1686) guanine Guiana Space Centre guidance, inertial Guide Star Catalog (GSC) guided missile guided missiles, postwar development Guillaume, Charles Édouard (1861 — 1938) Gulf Stream (ocean current) Gulfstream (jet plane) Gullstrand, Allvar (1862 — 1930) gum Gum Nebula gun metal gunpowder Gurwin Gusev Crater gut Gutenberg, Johann (c. 1400 — 1468) Guy, Richard Kenneth (1916 ---RRB- guyot Guzman Prize gymnosperm gynecology gynoecium gypsum gyrocompass gyrofrequency gyropilot gyroscope gyrostabilizer Gyulbudagian's Nebula (HH215)

It is rather surprising that adding cloud lifetime effect forcing makes any difference, insofar as Aldrin is estimating indirect and direct aerosol forcings as part of his Bayesian procedure.

The total of -0.7 W / m ^ 2 is the same as the best observational (satellite) total aerosol adjusted forcing estimate given in the leaked Second Order Draft of AR5 WG1, which includes cloud lifetime (2nd indirect) and other effects.

When Aldrin adds a fixed cloud lifetime effect of -0.25 W / m ^ 2 forcing on top of his variable parameter direct and (1st) indirect aerosol forcing, the mode of the sensitivity PDF increases from 1.6 to 1.8.

Earth's measured energy imbalance has been used to infer the climate forcing by aerosols, with two independent analyses yielding a forcing in the past decade of about − 1.5 W / m2 [64], [72], including the direct aerosol forcing and indirect effects via induced cloud changes.

In addition, since the global surface temperature records are a measure that responds to albedo changes (volcanic aerosols, cloud cover, land use, snow and ice cover) solar output, and differences in partition of various forcings into the oceans / atmosphere / land / cryosphere, teasing out just the effect of CO2 + water vapor over the short term is difficult to impossible.

Could the climate forcing itself, such as increasing GHGs, affect parameterizations independently of the larger scale climate changes (for example, by changing thermal damping of various kinds of waves, or by changing the differences of radiative effects between different amounts and kinds of clouds)?

Even if the total effect of clouds has not been nailed down yet, it is obviously a small effect compared to the rest of the forcings and feedbacks in the system.

«By comparing the response of clouds and water vapor to ENSO forcing in nature with that in AMIP simulations by some leading climate models, an earlier evaluation of tropical cloud and water vapor feedbacks has revealed two common biases in the models: (1) an underestimate of the strength of the negative cloud albedo feedback and (2) an overestimate of the positive feedback from the greenhouse effect of water vapor.

He goes so far as to say that the IPCC is biased against «internal radiative forcing,» in favor of treating cloud effects as feedback.

Critics of this result might argue that the solar forcing in these experiments is only based on the estimated change in total irradiance, which might be an underestimate, or that does not include potential indirect amplifying effects (via an ozone response to UV changes, or galactic cosmic rays affecting clouds).

It is my understanding that the uncertainties regarding climate sensitivity to a nominal 2XCO2 forcing is primarily a function of the uncertainties in (1) future atmospheric aerosol concentrations; both sulfate - type (cooling) and black carbon - type (warming), (2) feedbacks associated with aerosol effects on the properties of clouds (e.g. will cloud droplets become more reflective?)

The top panel shows the direct effects of the individual components, while the second panel attributes various indirect factors (associated with atmospheric chemistry, aerosol cloud interactions and albedo effects) and includes a model estimate of the «efficacy» of the forcing that depends on its spatial distribution.

The details of the physics of different forcings (i.e. ozone effects due to solar, snow albedo and cloud effects due to aerosols etc.) do vary the feedbacks slightly differently though.

(Note that radiative forcing is not necessarily proportional to reduction in atmospheric transparency, because relatively opaque layers in the lower warmer troposphere (water vapor, and for the fractional area they occupy, low level clouds) can reduce atmospheric transparency a lot on their own while only reducing the net upward LW flux above them by a small amount; colder, higher - level clouds will have a bigger effect on the net upward LW flux above them (per fraction of areal coverage), though they will have a smaller effect on the net upward LW flux below them.

In fact, if the physics - based understanding of «equilibrium sensitivity» to any forcing is too low, then not only will CO2 have a greater effect, so too will all other forcings, such as: changes in the sun, in cloud cover, in albedo, etc..

First, for changing just CO2 forcing (or CH4, etc, or for a non-GHE forcing, such as a change in incident solar radiation, volcanic aerosols, etc.), there will be other GHE radiative «forcings» (feedbacks, though in the context of measuring their radiative effect, they can be described as having radiative forcings of x W / m2 per change in surface T), such as water vapor feedback, LW cloud feedback, and also, because GHE depends on the vertical temperature distribution, the lapse rate feedback (this generally refers to the tropospheric lapse rate, though changes in the position of the tropopause and changes in the stratospheric temperature could also be considered lapse - rate feedbacks for forcing at TOA; forcing at the tropopause with stratospheric adjustment takes some of that into account; sensitivity to forcing at the tropopause with stratospheric adjustment will generally be different from sensitivity to forcing without stratospheric adjustment and both will generally be different from forcing at TOA before stratospheric adjustment; forcing at TOA after stratospehric adjustment is identical to forcing at the tropopause after stratospheric adjustment).

wilt, the paper you cite describes what in their view is a «small but statistically significant effect of cosmic rays on cloud formation, which in no way invalidates the large and significant effects of human emissions on the current anthropogenic radiative forcing budget of the atmosphere.

These forcings are spatially heterogeneous and include the effect of aerosols on clouds and associated precipitation [e.g., Rosenfeld et al., 2008], the influence of aerosol deposition (e.g., black carbon (soot)[Flanner et al. 2007] and reactive nitrogen [Galloway et al., 2004]-RRB-, and the role of changes in land use / land cover [e.g., Takata et al., 2009].

# 92 Spencer el al 2007 paper doesn't really support the precise mechanism proposed by Lindzen for Iris effect, but more simply observes a strong TOA negative correction associated with warming events at 20 ° S - 20 ° N (that is: in the 2000 - 2005 period of observation, the most significative warming episodes of the surface + low troposphere — 40 days or more — leads to a negative SW+LW cloud forcing at the top of the atmosphere).

LOL — Your claims global brightening from reduced cloud cover is a climate forcing without considering the effect of such cloud cover changes on outgoing IR.

Indirect aerosol effect - Aerosols may lead to an indirect radiative forcing of the climate system through acting as cloud condensation nuclei or modifying the optical properties and lifetime of clouds.

You claim that what you're doing shows the effect of cloud forcing uncertainty in the models, but if those results are plainly not really representative of what would happen in the models, then there's a disconnect.

If, for instance, CO2 concentrations are doubled, then the absorption would increase by 4 W / m2, but once the water vapor and clouds react, the absorption increases by almost 20 W / m2 — demonstrating that (in the GISS climate model, at least) the «feedbacks» are amplifying the effects of the initial radiative forcing from CO2 alone.

The effect of this mixed dust - pollution plume on the Pacific cloud systems and the associated radiative forcing is an outstanding problem for understanding climate change and has not been explored.

If ∆ T = λ ∆ Q is a reasonable approximation of the (large - scale) effects of forcing on globally averaged temperature, why does it matter if a few clouds are banging around locally on a given day?

On the uncertainty of CO2 forcing, my experience has been that the biggest uncertainy is not in the radiation models themselves, but in the effect of clouds.

Going forwards CO2 forcing is several times larger than the LIA solar forcing which was itself measurable in the surface temperature record, so we expect CO2 forcing to be measurable for sure, and yes, it will be accompanied by some effects of changing clouds too, but we don't know which direction they would push it.

adding two variables that were requested in the ACCMIP Word document but not explained in the spreadsheet: the longwave and the shortwave cloud radiative forcing with reference (fixed) composition, for diagnosis of aerosol indirect effect.

Radiative effects of surface - observed cloud cover anomalies, called «cloud cover radiative forcing (CCRF) anomalies,» are estimated based on a linear relationship to climatological cloud radiative forcing per unit cloud cover.

This led to a nasty scene, when he said I was unable to see what was obvious, ever - accelerating cooling which would lead to a runaway «Neptune Effect» because of mechanisms of positive feedback (his best examples were clouds which collect over the winter solstice — the «in - law» effect — persisting through to mid-February — the «Cupid» effect — and combining forces to wreck the climate for the entire first half of the Effect» because of mechanisms of positive feedback (his best examples were clouds which collect over the winter solstice — the «in - law» effect — persisting through to mid-February — the «Cupid» effect — and combining forces to wreck the climate for the entire first half of the effect — persisting through to mid-February — the «Cupid» effect — and combining forces to wreck the climate for the entire first half of the effect — and combining forces to wreck the climate for the entire first half of the year.)

As I have pointed out before, it seems to me that a fair evaluation of climate models is impossible when there remains vast uncertainty in aerosol forcing (direct and indirect), and substantial uncertainty in cloud effects.

«This is the cause - versus - effect issue I have been harping on for years: You can not measure cloud FEEDBACK (temperature changes causing cloud changes) unless you can quantify and remove the effect of internal radiative FORCING (cloud changes causing temperature changes).

«Here, it is sufficient to note that many of the 20CEN / A1B simulations neglect negative forcings arising from stratospheric ozone depletion, volcanic dust, and indirect aerosol effects on clouds... It is likely that omission of these negative forcings contributes to the positive bias in the model average TLT trends in Figure 6F.

Andrew Lacis wrote: (3) Water vapor and clouds account for about 75 % the strength of the terrestrial greenhouse effect, but are feedback effects that require sustained radiative forcing to maintain their atmospheric distribution.

As such cloud variation, independent of temperature COULD be a significant independent variable, a true cause or forcing of the climate given the great GHG / albedo effect they have, perhaps it deserves greater investigation?

Instead, the aim of our Science paper was to illustrate as clearly and as simply as possible the basic operating principles of the terrestrial greenhouse effect in terms of the sustaining radiative forcing that is provided by the non-condensing greenhouse gases, which is further augmented by the feedback response of water vapor and clouds.

(3) Water vapor and clouds account for about 75 % the strength of the terrestrial greenhouse effect, but are feedback effects that require sustained radiative forcing to maintain their atmospheric distribution.

Claiming that the evidence for a particular mechanism of enhanced solar forcing (GCR - cloud) suggests a weak effect is not a counter to the admission of substantial evidence that SOME such mechanism does have a powerful effect.

He thinks GCR - cloud effects should be weak (a very premature conclusion) and decides on that grounds that the whole idea of enhanced solar forcing can be dismissed, despite that added sentence to the contrary.

Clouds are in fact such a strong cooling force that is has been estimated by several sources (Theodor Landscheidt, 1998) that having clouds cover 1 % more of the Earth's surface would cancel the heating effect of a doubling of CO2.

Earth's measured energy imbalance has been used to infer the climate forcing by aerosols, with two independent analyses yielding a forcing in the past decade of about − 1.5 W / m2 [64], [72], including the direct aerosol forcing and indirect effects via induced cloud changes.

One aspect of Roy Spencer's work is that internal random oscillations of things like surface ocean temperature spatial patterns (affected by winds) which can affect clouds could have a forcing effect that could easily be mistaken for climate sensitivity to external forcing.

Increasing the brightness of marine stratocumulus clouds, as proposed by John Latham, would affect about 17 % of the earth's surface, and the Lenton - Vaughan analysis suggests that the whitening effect would have to be considerably more marked than previous work has assumed; but if that brightening could be achieved then a negative forcing that averages more than 3W / m ² should be possible.

«There is nothing inherently wrong with defining aerosol changes to be a forcing, but it is practically impossible to accurately determine the aerosol forcing because it depends sensitively on the geographical and altitude distribution of aerosols, aerosol absorption, and aerosol cloud effects for each of several aerosol compositions.

Hartmnn derived an average cloud radiative forcing of -27.6 W / m ^ 2 — a net cooling — as the overall average effect of clouds on global climate.