Sentences with phrase «increase with warming over»

Not exact matches

The record - breaking cold in Erie County this month may have led to an increase in infants sleeping with parents or having blankets placed over them while sleeping in an effort to keep them warm.

For a start, observational records are now roughly five years longer, and the global temperature increase over this period has been largely consistent with IPCC projections of greenhouse gas — driven warming made in previous reports dating back to 1990.

The findings were not a total surprise, with future projections showing that even with moderate climate warming, air temperatures over the higher altitudes increase even more than at sea level, and that, on average, fewer winter storm systems will impact the state.

They found that people high in the psychological attribute called attachment anxiety (a tendency to worry about the proximity and availability of a romantic partner) responded to memories of a relationship breakup with an increased preference for warm - temperature foods over cooler ones: soup over crackers.

Terrestrial ecosystems have encountered substantial warming over the past century, with temperatures increasing about twice as rapidly over land as over the oceans.

Southern Ocean seafloor water temperatures are projected to warm by an average of 0.4 °C over this century with some areas possibly increasing by as much as 2 °C.

Projected global warming will likely decrease the extent of temperate drylands by a third over the remainder of the 21st century coupled with an increase in dry deep soil conditions during agricultural growing season.

Over the last decade, rock avalanches and landslides have become more common in high mountain ranges, apparently coinciding with the increase in exceptionally warm periods (see «Early signs»).

Thus, a homeowner will probably not be able to show that the hurricane that destroyed his house was spawned by global warming, but the state of Florida may well prove that increased damage to coastal property over several years has a lot to do with climate change.

Although plant activity can increase with warmer temperatures and higher carbon dioxideconcentrations, the change in carbon dioxide amplitude over the last 50 years is larger than expected from these effects.

However, delaying additional mitigation to 2030 will substantially increase the technological, economic, social and institutional challenges associated with limiting the warming over the 21st century to below 2ºC relative to pre-industrial levels, the report finds.

«Looking at weather and dengue incidents over longer periods, we found a similar strong link between how increased rainfall and warmer temperatures resulting from the reoccurring el Niño phenomenon are associated with elevated risks of dengue epidemics.

Contrary to what you might expect, the third IPPC report predicted that global warming would most likely lead to a thickening of the ice sheet over the next century, with increased snowfall compensating for any melting cause by warming.

Coral skeletons are the building blocks of diverse coral reef ecosystems, which has led to increasing concern over how these key species will cope with warming and acidifying oceans that threaten their stability.

This continues the trend of warming winters over the past few decades as the climate warms from increasing greenhouse gases, with the eastern two - thirds of the country warming the most during the winter.

There was a warm, stable climate with dispersed continents surounded by vast warm and shallow seas over continental shelves that provided light, oxygen, and nutrients for life to thrive in, because intense mountain - building also increased erosion and the discharge of eroded nutrients into those seas.

As it turned out, the world's temperature has risen about 0.8 °C (1.4 °F) and mainstream scientists continue to predict, with increasing urgency, that if emissions are not curtailed, carbon pollution would lock in warming of as much as 3 to 6 °C (or 5 to 11 °F) over the next several decades.

Over the last decade, rock avalanches and landslides have become more common in high mountain ranges, apparently coinciding with the increase in exceptionally warm periods.

The increased risk of further heat waves (intensive heat over relatively short time scales) as well as exposure to warmer temperatures over the longer term, suggest that recovery will depend on thermally - resistant individuals that may trade - off high temperature tolerance with other important attributes such as nutritional value or rapid growth.

Temperature extremes over these years is basically in line with what is expected under global warming - an increase in extremely warm episodes and a decline in extremely cold ones.

Additionally, sea level rise driven by climate warming combined with coastal subsidence related to human activities increased the storm surge while urban development such as paving over grasslands and prairies are likely to have exacerbated flooding.

In contrast, the scenario in Fig. 5A, with global warming peaking just over 1 °C and then declining slowly, should allow summer sea ice to survive and then gradually increase to levels representative of recent decades.

«suggesting that Arctic warming will continue to greatly exceed the global average over the coming century, with concomitant reductions in terrestrial ice masses and, consequently, an increasing rate of sea level rise.»

These have shown about a 0.7 C warming over land during the last century, with somewhat less increase indicated over oceans.

«The major trends over time are a wintertime WVP and LWP increase south and southwest of Greenland also seen in precipitation, consistent with modification of continental air flowing out over increasingly warmer waters.

Many of the experts (like Dr Hansen) dealing with global warming rightfully only look at what they think is going on and since the concentration of carbon dioxide (although I still have no idea how they can get an average concentration reading instantly all over the world) has increased, the culprit of global warming is this increase of carbon dioxide.

And as early as the 1970s, researchers predicted that increased greenhouse gas production was accelerating global warming, with the potentially catastrophic consequences that are playing out now, all over the world.

So for example deglaciation warmed global mean temps by about 5 C over 10k years with a radiative forcing of about 6.5 W / m2 (total of both GHG increases and albedo decreases).

There are various interpretations possible, e.g. a) The big increase in hurricane power over the past 30 years or so may not have much to do with global warming, or b) The models are simply not faithfully reproducing what nature is doing.

Paul S (# 1)-- Since the Planck Response dominates over positive feedback responses to temperature, wouldn't a La Nina - like failure of surface temperature to rise lead to an increase rather than a reduction in energy accumulation compared with accumulation during a surface warming — presumably a small increase, so that the observed rise in ocean heat content would still be substantial?

The number of Americans who say they discuss global warming with family and friends at least occasionally increased by 9 percentage points over the past six months.

[T] here have now been several recent papers showing much the same — numerous factors including: the increase in positive forcing (CO2 and the recent work on black carbon), decrease in estimated negative forcing (aerosols), combined with the stubborn refusal of the planet to warm as had been predicted over the last decade, all makes a high climate sensitivity increasingly untenable.

Warming must occur below the tropopause to increase the net LW flux out of the tropopause to balance the tropopause - level forcing; there is some feedback at that point as the stratosphere is «forced» by the fraction of that increase which it absorbs, and a fraction of that is transfered back to the tropopause level — for an optically thick stratosphere that could be significant, but I think it may be minor for the Earth as it is (while CO2 optical thickness of the stratosphere alone is large near the center of the band, most of the wavelengths in which the stratosphere is not transparent have a more moderate optical thickness on the order of 1 (mainly from stratospheric water vapor; stratospheric ozone makes a contribution over a narrow wavelength band, reaching somewhat larger optical thickness than stratospheric water vapor)(in the limit of an optically thin stratosphere at most wavelengths where the stratosphere is not transparent, changes in the net flux out of the stratosphere caused by stratospheric warming or cooling will tend to be evenly split between upward at TOA and downward at the tropopause; with greater optically thickness over a larger fraction of optically - significant wavelengths, the distribution of warming or cooling within the stratosphere will affect how such a change is distributed, and it would even be possible for stratospheric adjustment to have opposite effects on the downward flux at the tropopause and the upward flux aWarming must occur below the tropopause to increase the net LW flux out of the tropopause to balance the tropopause - level forcing; there is some feedback at that point as the stratosphere is «forced» by the fraction of that increase which it absorbs, and a fraction of that is transfered back to the tropopause level — for an optically thick stratosphere that could be significant, but I think it may be minor for the Earth as it is (while CO2 optical thickness of the stratosphere alone is large near the center of the band, most of the wavelengths in which the stratosphere is not transparent have a more moderate optical thickness on the order of 1 (mainly from stratospheric water vapor; stratospheric ozone makes a contribution over a narrow wavelength band, reaching somewhat larger optical thickness than stratospheric water vapor)(in the limit of an optically thin stratosphere at most wavelengths where the stratosphere is not transparent, changes in the net flux out of the stratosphere caused by stratospheric warming or cooling will tend to be evenly split between upward at TOA and downward at the tropopause; with greater optically thickness over a larger fraction of optically - significant wavelengths, the distribution of warming or cooling within the stratosphere will affect how such a change is distributed, and it would even be possible for stratospheric adjustment to have opposite effects on the downward flux at the tropopause and the upward flux awarming or cooling will tend to be evenly split between upward at TOA and downward at the tropopause; with greater optically thickness over a larger fraction of optically - significant wavelengths, the distribution of warming or cooling within the stratosphere will affect how such a change is distributed, and it would even be possible for stratospheric adjustment to have opposite effects on the downward flux at the tropopause and the upward flux awarming or cooling within the stratosphere will affect how such a change is distributed, and it would even be possible for stratospheric adjustment to have opposite effects on the downward flux at the tropopause and the upward flux at TOA).

Northern Hemisphere mean temperatures do appear to have cooled over that period, and that contrasts with a continuing increase in CO2, which if all else had been equal, should have led to warming.

As a result, the Earth has warmed at an alarming rate over the past century, with average temperatures increasing by more than 0.8 °C (1.5 °F).

Consenquently, the associated SST pattern is slightly cooler in the deep convection upwelling regions of the Equitorial Pacific and the Indian Ocean, strongly cooler in the nearest deep convection source region of the South Atlantic near Africa and the Equator, warm over the bulk of the North Atlantic, strongly warmer where the gulf stream loses the largest portion of its heat near 50N 25W, and strongly cooler near 45N 45W, which turns out to be a back - eddy of the Gulf Stream with increased transport of cold water from the north whenever the Gulf Stream is running quickly.

'' a) The big increase in hurricane power over the past 30 years or so may not have much to do with global warming, or b) The models are simply not faithfully reproducing what nature is doing.

(1) One is the ice sheet and glacier mechanical collapse, which doesn't require a whole lot more warming, but will happen with some set minimum amount of warming over some time period; and (2) the other is global warming that keeps increasing beyond the level needed to cause # 1, which among other things will perhaps lead to positive carbon feedbacks (e.g., from melting permafrost and hydrates).

If it is correct then how can the GHG warming be a ratio of forcings (ie 1.5 over 0.3) higher which does NOT agree with the observed temperature increase.

And, as the satellite observations of Spencer and Braswell showed, as the planet warms over a period of several months, clouds act as a net negative feedback (the reflecting low - altitude clouds increase more than the absorbing high - altitude clouds with warming).

This albedo has been changing over recent decades and is responsible for most ocean warming with the increased maintained higher solar levels.

Mean and maximal temperatures of the upper 20 m of the lake increased by > 2 oC over 21 years with the 6 coolest years in the early 1980s and the 6 warmest years in the late 90s and early 2000s.

Spencer + Braswell have shown that over the tropics on a shorter - term basis, the net overall feedback from clouds with warming is negative; this is largely due to an increase in reflection of incoming radiation by increased clouds with a smaller effect from the reduction of energy trapping high altitude clouds, which slow down outgoing radiation by absorbing and re-radiating energy.

Annual average evaporation (Figure 10.12) increases over much of the ocean, with spatial variations tending to relate to those in the surface warming (Figure 10.8).

In the SH, changes in circulation related to an increase in the SAM from the 1960s to the present are associated with strong warming over the Antarctic Peninsula and, to a lesser extent, cooling over parts of continental Antarctica.

If I understood Armour's paper correctly, he claimed that all feed - backs were close to linear in response to temperature over time, but that different regional warming rates (specifically, slow warming at high latitudes) could make the feed - backs and sensitivity appear to increase with time.

Based on this, the longer term planning should probably be based (from the available evidence) on an assumption of a measurable increase in temperature over the next 15 - 20 years, with the uncertainty being in the range «slight cooling» to «significant warming».

Even though some of the CMIP models produce a lot of global warming, all of them are still stable in this regard, with net increases in lost radiation with warming (NOTE: If analyzing the transient CMIP runs where CO2 is increased over long periods of time, one must first remove that radiative forcing in order to see the increase in radiative loss).

There are numerous statements I do agree with, such as the fact there has been some warming over the last 100 or so years, and that CO2 increase is probably due in large part to human activity.

Even with this increase over the last 11 years, the fact remains that still less than a majority of Americans, at this point, believe global warming will pose a serious threat to them in their lifetimes.