Sentences with phrase «global climate sensitivity from»

Is it possible to put together a global climate sensitivity from Dr. Pielke's data?

the figures in the above were based on: «Deriving global climate sensitivity from palaeoclimate reconstructions» Hoffert and Covey, Nature Vol 360, 10th December 1992.

Not exact matches

That uncertainty is represented in the latest crop of global climate models, which assume a climate sensitivity of anywhere from about 3 to 8 degrees F.

2) A better ability to constrain climate sensitivity from the past century's data 3) It will presumably be anticorrelated with year to year variations in global surface temperature that we see, especially from El Ninos and La Ninas, which will be nice whenever we have a cool year and the deniers cry out «global warming stopped!».

Plotting GHG forcing (7) from ice core data (27) against temperature shows that global climate sensitivity including the slow surface albedo feedback is 1.5 °C per W / m2 or 6 °C for doubled CO2 (Fig. 2), twice as large as the Charney fast - feedback sensitivity.»

Then, if you scale the Antarctic temperature change to a global temperature change, then the global climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 becomes 2 - 3 degrees C, perfectly in line with the climate sensitivity given by IPCC (and known from Arrhenius's calculations more than 100 years ago).

We calculate global temperature change for a given CO2 scenario using a climate response function (Table S3) that accurately replicates results from a global climate model with sensitivity 3 °C for doubled CO2 [64].

The warming effect of CO2 on climate is physically well - understood, and the sensitivity of global temperature to CO2 is independently confirmed by paleoclimatic data, see e.g. Rohling et al. 2012 or the brand - new paper by Friedrich et al. 2016 (here is a nice write - up on this paper from Peter Hannam in the Sydney Morning Herald).

Unfortunately for policymakers and the public, while the basic science pointing to a rising human influence on climate is clear, many of the most important questions will remain surrounded by deep complexity and uncertainty for a long time to come: the pace at which seas will rise, the extent of warming from a certain buildup of greenhouse gases (climate sensitivity), the impact on hurricanes, the particular effects in particular places (what global warming means for Addis Ababa or Atlanta).

2) A better ability to constrain climate sensitivity from the past century's data 3) It will presumably be anticorrelated with year to year variations in global surface temperature that we see, especially from El Ninos and La Ninas, which will be nice whenever we have a cool year and the deniers cry out «global warming stopped!».

The obvious answer (from someone who is indeed receptive to arguments for lower - than - consensus climate sensitivities) is that it was on a par with recent hot years because temperatures at US latitudes of the globe really weren't as much cooler in the 1930s / 1940s (compared to the present) than GISS / Hadley's best estimates (from often sketchy global coverage) suggest.

CONCLUSION The values for the global climate sensitivity published by the IPCC cover a range from 2.1 ̊C — 4.4 ̊C with an average value of 3.2 ̊C, which is seven times larger than that predicted here.

Nature (with hopefully some constructive input from humans) will decide the global warming question based upon climate sensitivity, net radiative forcing, and oceanic storage of heat, not on the type of multi-decadal time scale variability we are discussing here.

In this case the CO2 concentration is instantaneously quadrupled and kept constant for 150 years of simulation, and both equilibrium climate sensitivity and RF are diagnosed from a linear fit of perturbations in global mean surface temperature to the instantaneous radiative imbalance at the TOA.

Then, if you scale the Antarctic temperature change to a global temperature change, then the global climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 becomes 2 - 3 degrees C, perfectly in line with the climate sensitivity given by IPCC (and known from Arrhenius's calculations more than 100 years ago).

Because each GCM has a different climate sensitivity, the global warming which occurs due to a doubling of CO2 varies from model to model.

Second, we compared projections centered 80 years from now (2070 — 2099) from two global climate models with higher and lower sensitivities to atmospheric greenhouse gas levels.

In other words, these are 3D global simulations from which globally averaged TOA fluxes and temperatures are determined, which are then used to determine the climate sensitivity.

If climate obeyed that variant of the AHH law, not even nanokelvins could estimate climate sensitivity and Hansen delay simultaneously from a global temperature time series.

With a climate sensitivity of roughly 1 from «settled» CO2 science, some evidence for natural shifts in global climate of 0.5 - 1.0 degK, and a fair amount of uncertainty in feedbacks, my Italian flag (based on physics) will probably be mostly white if climate sensitivity is > 2.5.

Could unrecognized systemic bias from excluded or unrecognized physics be causing the major disconnect between observations of climate sensitivity and projections from global climate models?

C: increase in atmospheric CO2 from pre-industrial to present is anthropogenic (D / A) S: best guess for likely climate sensitivity (NUM) s: 2 - sigma range of S (NUM) a: ocean acidification will be a problem (D / A) L: expected sea level rise by 2100 in cm (all contributions)(NUM) B: climate change will be beneficial (D / A) R: CO2 emissions need to be reduced drastically by 2050 (D / A) T: technical advances will take care of any problems (D / A) r: the 20th century global temperature record is reliable (D / A) H: over the last 1000 years global temperature was hockey stick shaped (D / A) D: data has been intentionally distorted by scientist to support the idea of anthropogenic climate change (D / A) g: the CRU - mails are important for the science (D / A) G: the CRU - mails are important otherwise (D / A)

[Equilibrium] climate sensitivity is defined as the increase in global mean surface temperature (GMST), once the ocean has reached equilibrium, resulting from a doubling of the equivalent atmospheric CO2 concentration, being the concentration of CO2 that would cause the same radiative forcing as the given mixture of CO2 and other forcing components.

Indeed, because climate sensitivity is less than 1.0 °C for a doubling of CO2 equivalent, it is physically impossible for the man - made global warming to be large enough to be detected (just as the global warming from UHI is too small to be detected).

That's right, the latest climate science (some 10 studies published in just the past 3 years) indicates that the earth's climate sensitivity — that is, how much the global average surface temperature will rise as a result of greenhouse gases emitted from human activities — is some 33 percent less than scientists thought at the time of the last IPCC Assessment, published in 2007.

The high climate sensitivity programmed into the IPCC's climate models is entirely dependent of this hotspot of positive feedback - with the hotspot, climate models predict a scary global warming range that spans from 2 °C to 6 °C.

The near - linear rate of anthropogenic warming (predominantly from anthropogenic greenhouse gases) is shown in sources such as: «Deducing Multidecadal Anthropogenic Global Warming Trends Using Multiple Regression Analysis» «The global warming hiatus — a natural product of interactions of a secular warming trend and a multi-decadal oscillation» «The Origin and Limits of the Near Proportionality between Climate Warming and Cumulative CO2 Emissions» «Sensitivity of climate to cumulative carbon emissions due to compensation of ocean heat and carbon uptake» «Return periods of global climate fluctuations and the pause» «Using data to attribute episodes of warming and cooling in instrumental records» «The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean mixing&Global Warming Trends Using Multiple Regression Analysis» «The global warming hiatus — a natural product of interactions of a secular warming trend and a multi-decadal oscillation» «The Origin and Limits of the Near Proportionality between Climate Warming and Cumulative CO2 Emissions» «Sensitivity of climate to cumulative carbon emissions due to compensation of ocean heat and carbon uptake» «Return periods of global climate fluctuations and the pause» «Using data to attribute episodes of warming and cooling in instrumental records» «The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean mixing&global warming hiatus — a natural product of interactions of a secular warming trend and a multi-decadal oscillation» «The Origin and Limits of the Near Proportionality between Climate Warming and Cumulative CO2 Emissions» «Sensitivity of climate to cumulative carbon emissions due to compensation of ocean heat and carbon uptake» «Return periods of global climate fluctuations and the pause» «Using data to attribute episodes of warming and cooling in instrumental records» «The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean mixingClimate Warming and Cumulative CO2 Emissions» «Sensitivity of climate to cumulative carbon emissions due to compensation of ocean heat and carbon uptake» «Return periods of global climate fluctuations and the pause» «Using data to attribute episodes of warming and cooling in instrumental records» «The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean miSensitivity of climate to cumulative carbon emissions due to compensation of ocean heat and carbon uptake» «Return periods of global climate fluctuations and the pause» «Using data to attribute episodes of warming and cooling in instrumental records» «The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean mixingclimate to cumulative carbon emissions due to compensation of ocean heat and carbon uptake» «Return periods of global climate fluctuations and the pause» «Using data to attribute episodes of warming and cooling in instrumental records» «The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean mixing&global climate fluctuations and the pause» «Using data to attribute episodes of warming and cooling in instrumental records» «The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean mixingclimate fluctuations and the pause» «Using data to attribute episodes of warming and cooling in instrumental records» «The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean mixing&global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean misensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean mixing»

Indeed, because climate sensitivity is less than 1.0 deg.C for a doubling of CO2 equivalent, it is physically impossible for the man - made global warming to be large enough to be detected (just as the global warming from UHI is too small to be detected).

from the pdf: Using a global energy budget approach, this paper seeks to understand the implications for climate sensitivity (both ECS and TCR) of the new estimates of radiative forcing and uncertainty therein given in AR5.

Independently from the CO2 attribution, global cooling will disagree with the CO2GW hypothesis and the «climate sensitivity estimates».

We calculate global temperature change for a given CO2 scenario using a climate response function (Table S3) that accurately replicates results from a global climate model with sensitivity 3 °C for doubled CO2 [64].

In your view, what is the likely value for climate sensitivity for global warming from doubling of CO2?

Carbon Brief reported that Ridley made a wide range of claims throughout, touching on subjects from ocean acidification and climate sensitivity through to energy subsidies and the «benefits» of global warming.

The results open the possibility that recent climate sensitivity estimates from global observations and [intermediate complexity models] are systematically considerably lower or higher than the truth, since they are typically based on the same realization of climate variability.»

''... had the IPCC FAR correctly projected the changes in atmospheric GHG from 1990 to 2011, their «best estimate» model with a 2.5 °C equilibrium climate sensitivity would have projected the ensuing global warming very accurately»

The basic postulate of IPCC climate alarmism is the relation dQ = 4 dT connecting radiative forcing dQ to global warming dT, with dQ = 4 Watts / m ^ 2 from doubling of CO2 giving a climate sensitivity or global warming of dT = 1 C, which is inflated to 1.5 — 4.5 C by feed back.

«Results imply that global and regional warming rates depend sensitively on regional ocean processes setting the [ocean heat uptake] pattern, and that equilibrium climate sensitivity can not be reliably estimated from transient observations.»

I'm not able to find any peer reviewed papers which derive this logarithmic CO2 versus temperature rise formula from basic physics, nor am I able to find papers which prove that climate sensitivity is a global constant regardless of local surface temperatures; seems counterintuitive to me; maybe I should get a PhD too!

Using measured amounts of GHGs during the past 800000 years of glacial — interglacial climate oscillations and surface albedo inferred from sea - level data, we show that a single empirical «fast - feedback» climate sensitivity can account well for the global temperature change over that range of climate states.

Much of the recent discussion of climate sensitivity in online forums and in peer - reviewed literature focuses on two areas: cutting off the so - called «long tail» of low probability \ high climate sensitivities (e.g., above 6 C or so), and reconciling the recent slowdown in observed surface warming with predictions from global climate models.

If we assume that the climate is equally sensitive to radiative forcing from each of these causes, the net increase of 1.2 watts should have brought about an increase in global mean temperature of 0.3 to 1.1 °C, depending on the climate sensitivity that is assumed.

The earth's climate sensitivity is the most important climate factor in determining how much global warming will result from our greenhouse gas emissions (primarily from burning of fossil fuels to produce, reliable, cheap energy).

As we face a potential doubling or tripling of ca from its preindustrial value by the end of this century [Solomon et al., 2007], a long - term climate sensitivity exceeding 3 °C for CO2 doubling has important ramifications for a range of critical global economic, social, and political issues [Hansen et al., 2013].

Together these two feedbacks fully account for the global temperature swings from glacial to interglacial conditions (Fig. 2C), with a climate sensitivity of 3/4 °C per W / m2 of forcing, or 3 °C for doubled CO2 forcing.

Climate sensitivity is 0.5 K from the global energy budget of the earth, and it is 0.8 K from the data analysis of Pinatubo eruption.

Recently there have been some studies and comments by a few climate scientists that based on the slowed global surface warming over the past decade, estimates of the Earth's overall equilibrium climate sensitivity (the total amount of global surface warming in response to the increased greenhouse effect from a doubling of atmospheric CO2, including amplifying and dampening feedbacks) may be a bit too high.

The IPCC defines Equilibrium climate sensitivity as the change in global mean temperature that results when the climate system, or a climate model, attains a new equilibrium with the forcing change resulting from a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration.

A recent study by C10 analysed a number of different climate variables in a set of SMEs of HadCM3 (Gordon et al. 2000, atmosphere — ocean coupled version of HadSM3) from the point of view of global - scale model errors and climate change forcings and feedbacks, and compared them with variables derived from the CMIP3 MME. Knutti et al. (2006) examined another SME based on the HadSM3 model, and found a strong relationship between the magnitude of the seasonal cycle and climate sensitivity, which was not reproduced in the CMIP3 ensemble.

The model accounts systematically for key sources of uncertainty stemming from human emission pathways, global climate sensitivity and regional shifts in climate change.

9.3.1 Global Mean Response 9.3.1.1 1 % / yr CO2 increase (CMIP2) experiments 9.3.1.2 Projections of future climate from forcing scenario experiments (IS92a) 9.3.1.3 Marker scenario experiments (SRES) 9.3.2 Patterns of Future Climate Change 9.3.2.1 Summary 9.3.3 Range of Temperature Response to SRES Emission Scenarios 9.3.3.1 Implications for temperature of stabilisation of greenhouse gases 9.3.4 Factors that Contribute to the Response 9.3.4.1 Climate sensitivity 9.3.4.2 The role of climate sensitivity and ocean heat uptake 9.3.4.3 Thermohaline circulation changes 9.3.4.4 Time - scales of response 9.3.5 Changes in Variability 9.3.5.1 Intra-seasonal variability 9.3.5.2 Interannual variability 9.3.5.3 Decadal and longer time - scale variability 9.3.5.4 Summary 9.3.6 Changes of Extreme Events 9.3.6.1 Temperature 9.3.6.2 Precipitation and convection 9.3.6.3 Extra-tropical storms 9.3.6.4 Tropical cyclones 9.3.6.5 Commentary on changes in extremes of weather and climate 9.3.6.6 Concclimate from forcing scenario experiments (IS92a) 9.3.1.3 Marker scenario experiments (SRES) 9.3.2 Patterns of Future Climate Change 9.3.2.1 Summary 9.3.3 Range of Temperature Response to SRES Emission Scenarios 9.3.3.1 Implications for temperature of stabilisation of greenhouse gases 9.3.4 Factors that Contribute to the Response 9.3.4.1 Climate sensitivity 9.3.4.2 The role of climate sensitivity and ocean heat uptake 9.3.4.3 Thermohaline circulation changes 9.3.4.4 Time - scales of response 9.3.5 Changes in Variability 9.3.5.1 Intra-seasonal variability 9.3.5.2 Interannual variability 9.3.5.3 Decadal and longer time - scale variability 9.3.5.4 Summary 9.3.6 Changes of Extreme Events 9.3.6.1 Temperature 9.3.6.2 Precipitation and convection 9.3.6.3 Extra-tropical storms 9.3.6.4 Tropical cyclones 9.3.6.5 Commentary on changes in extremes of weather and climate 9.3.6.6 ConcClimate Change 9.3.2.1 Summary 9.3.3 Range of Temperature Response to SRES Emission Scenarios 9.3.3.1 Implications for temperature of stabilisation of greenhouse gases 9.3.4 Factors that Contribute to the Response 9.3.4.1 Climate sensitivity 9.3.4.2 The role of climate sensitivity and ocean heat uptake 9.3.4.3 Thermohaline circulation changes 9.3.4.4 Time - scales of response 9.3.5 Changes in Variability 9.3.5.1 Intra-seasonal variability 9.3.5.2 Interannual variability 9.3.5.3 Decadal and longer time - scale variability 9.3.5.4 Summary 9.3.6 Changes of Extreme Events 9.3.6.1 Temperature 9.3.6.2 Precipitation and convection 9.3.6.3 Extra-tropical storms 9.3.6.4 Tropical cyclones 9.3.6.5 Commentary on changes in extremes of weather and climate 9.3.6.6 ConcClimate sensitivity 9.3.4.2 The role of climate sensitivity and ocean heat uptake 9.3.4.3 Thermohaline circulation changes 9.3.4.4 Time - scales of response 9.3.5 Changes in Variability 9.3.5.1 Intra-seasonal variability 9.3.5.2 Interannual variability 9.3.5.3 Decadal and longer time - scale variability 9.3.5.4 Summary 9.3.6 Changes of Extreme Events 9.3.6.1 Temperature 9.3.6.2 Precipitation and convection 9.3.6.3 Extra-tropical storms 9.3.6.4 Tropical cyclones 9.3.6.5 Commentary on changes in extremes of weather and climate 9.3.6.6 Concclimate sensitivity and ocean heat uptake 9.3.4.3 Thermohaline circulation changes 9.3.4.4 Time - scales of response 9.3.5 Changes in Variability 9.3.5.1 Intra-seasonal variability 9.3.5.2 Interannual variability 9.3.5.3 Decadal and longer time - scale variability 9.3.5.4 Summary 9.3.6 Changes of Extreme Events 9.3.6.1 Temperature 9.3.6.2 Precipitation and convection 9.3.6.3 Extra-tropical storms 9.3.6.4 Tropical cyclones 9.3.6.5 Commentary on changes in extremes of weather and climate 9.3.6.6 Concclimate 9.3.6.6 Conclusions