Sentences with phrase «large global warming effect»

He discovered the super greenhouse effect of halo carbons (CFCs) in 1975 and used observations to quantify the large global warming effect of black carbon.

Not exact matches

Taking into account the disastrous effects of the 2003 and 2010 heat wave events in Europe, and those of 2011 and 2012 in the USA, results show that we may be facing a serious risk of adverse impacts over larger and densely populated areas if mitigation strategies for reducing global warming are not implemented.

Other experts say that the effect of hurricanes on global warming would probably be minimal as only the largest storms are expected to get stronger.

A few years ago, he was trying to get people to take to his idea of how to mitigate global warming by pumping sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, mirroring the cooling effect caused by large volcanic eruptions.

While the water under the Antarctic ice is not itself related to global warming, the suprisingly large amount of water, the surprising speed with which it moves, and its effect of «lubricating» the movement of the Antarctic ice, may affect how the ice sheets respond to warming.

What's more, the haze has masked the effects of global warming across large parts of China, particularly in the central and eastern regions, where daily high temperatures have actually been decreasing.

The net effect of human - generated aerosols is more complicated and regionally variable — for example, in contrast to the local warming effect of the Asian Brown Cloud, global shipping produces large amounts of cooling reflective sulphate aerosols: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/08/990820022710.htm

China has the largest CO2 emissions today (Fig. 11A), but the global warming effect is closely proportional to cumulative emissions [190].

There's always an irony or two in the daily news, and today is no exception: Greenland, the world's largest island, is suffering from the effects of global warming at about twice the rate of the rest of the globe (except for Antarctica).

For instance, increasing cloud cover due to global warming may change the albedo, but this would be a feedback to a larger warming effect, rather than a cooling.

A global warming phenomenon in our spaceship is one of several unintended effects of the unregulated, swift increase of 1) absolute global human population numbers, 2) per capita consumption of limited resources, and 3) large - scale business activities that could be occurring synergistically and approaching a point in history when it will not be possible for the Earth's resource base and frangible ecosystems services to sustain life as we now know it to be.

There has been more then enough information presented on global warming, but large portions of the population fail to comprehend the effects of global warming or how valid the information is.

I don't think I try to poke holes at the idea that Arctic warming is «likely driven in part by the global greenhouse effect» but I do seek out weaknesses with suggestions that it is driven entirely, or to some very large degree, by a human - enhanced greenhouse effect (at least at the current time).

They discussed the effect of variables being non-iid on the extreme value analysis, and after taking that into account, propose that changes in extreme precipitation are likely to be larger than the corresponding changes in annual mean precipitation under a global warming.

The fact that the increase in damage cost is about as large as the increase in GDP (as recently argued at FiveThirtyEight) is certainly no strong evidence against an effect of global warming on damage cost.

I haven't thought much about the THC although I've expressed doubt about seeing large regional cooling if it did shut down or change direction, mainly because global warming is so rapid that any cooling effect with time would be dampened by warming factors going on.

Subject of some specific concern about global warming because of large temperature rises predicted for the arctic, and because of some arctic - specific feedback effects (e.g. the albedo feedback following loss of arctic sea ice).

But it does say; «Natural climate variations, which tend to involve localized changes in sea surface temperature, may have a larger effect on hurricane activity than the more uniform patterns of global warming...»

One is that the effect of global warming is slow, will warm both north and south poles equally, the change will get significant around 2060, and superimposed on top of that there is a lot of large (not not well - quantified) amplitude «weather» noise.

In particular, the authors find fault with IPCC's conclusions relating to human activities being the primary cause of recent global warming, claiming, contrary to significant evidence that they tend to ignore, that the comparatively small influences of natural changes in solar radiation are dominating the influences of the much larger effects of changes in the atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations on the global energy balance.

If future global emissions are not curbed, human - driven global warming could cause further large declines in long - term temperature variability, the lead author tells Carbon Brief, which may have far - reaching effects on the world's seasons and weather.

Interestingly, the paper «Climate Trends and Global food production since 1980» (Lobell, Schlenker, Costa - Roberts, in Sciencexpress, 5 May, Science 1204531) confirms my finding of the absence of climate change in the USA: «A notable exception to the [global] warming pattern is the United States, which produces c. 40 % of global maize and soybean and experienced a slight cooling over the period... the country with largest overall share of crop production (United States) showed no [adverse] effect due to the lack of significant climate trends&rGlobal food production since 1980» (Lobell, Schlenker, Costa - Roberts, in Sciencexpress, 5 May, Science 1204531) confirms my finding of the absence of climate change in the USA: «A notable exception to the [global] warming pattern is the United States, which produces c. 40 % of global maize and soybean and experienced a slight cooling over the period... the country with largest overall share of crop production (United States) showed no [adverse] effect due to the lack of significant climate trends&rglobal] warming pattern is the United States, which produces c. 40 % of global maize and soybean and experienced a slight cooling over the period... the country with largest overall share of crop production (United States) showed no [adverse] effect due to the lack of significant climate trends&rglobal maize and soybean and experienced a slight cooling over the period... the country with largest overall share of crop production (United States) showed no [adverse] effect due to the lack of significant climate trends».

The economic costs of natural disasters related to global warming are adding up; some of the largest effects of these catastrophes can be felt in the United States, where politics and policies are not keeping pace with the physical realities of climate change.

While changes in solar output have slightly increased global average temperature since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the planet - warming effect of man - made greenhouse gases is about 20 times larger -LRB-

The loss of large areas of ice on the surface could accelerate global warming because less of the sun's energy would be reflected away from Earth to begin with (refer back to our discussion of the greenhouse effect).

Accordingly, controlling emissions in small as well as large amounts is essential to prevent, slow the pace of, reduce the threats from, and mitigate global warming and its adverse effects.

When it is politically convenient to do so, ENSO is claimed to be an effect of «global warming» — i.e. that «global warming» causes more and larger El Nino and fewer and weaker La Nina episodes.

By examining the spatial pattern of both types of climate variation, the scientists found that the anthropogenic global warming signal was relatively spatially uniform over the tropical oceans and thus would not have a large effect on the atmospheric circulation, whereas the PDO shift in the 1990s consisted of warming in the tropical west Pacific and cooling in the subtropical and east tropical Pacific, which would enhance the existing sea surface temperature difference and thus intensify the circulation.

To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global trend from slightly negative / stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands» temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters» temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).

Indeed, a portion of that small linear trend difference might be due to human CO2 emissions; or, then again, it might be due to the vast urbanization effect over the last 60 + years; or due to the large deforestation that's taken place; or, maybe it's entirely due to the serial fabrication of global warming by the world's climate agencies; or it's even possible that the post-1950 warming was entirely a natural phenomenon - the same as the prior 64 - year period experience.

Your accusation that JQ is dogmatic is especially bizarre because he's written a ton of stuff, both at a professional and popular level, on the risk management approach needed in the face of the large uncertainties on the extent and effects of future global warming.

And, although the Union of Concerned Scientists receives most of their funding from member donations and fees, they also receive funds and grants from several large foundations (Web archive) that explicitly regard reducing the effects of man - made global warming as top priorities.

We consider several important climate impacts and use evidence from current observations to assess the effect of 0.8 °C warming and paleoclimate data for the effect of larger warming, especially the Eemian period, which had global mean temperature about +2 °C relative to pre-industrial time.

Geoengineering, the idea of deliberate, large - scale intervention in the Earth's climate system to help counteract the effects of global warming, has been in the news again.

And don't forget that the GOP in the House is still trying to eviscerate NASA's Earth science budget, which goes in large part to monitoring the effects of global warming.

Therefore, the rather large rise in CO2 can not be the cause of global warming [in reality, it is largely an effect, since rising CO2 follows temperature rises on all time scales, from months to hundreds of millennia.

according to paper 1, the paper by Ramanathan entitled «Trace - Gas Greenhouse Effect and Global Warming», the author states on page 3 (which is really labeled page 189 since it was in a larger journal i guess) under the section Anthropogenic Enhancement of the Greenhouse Effect — «an increase in greenhouse gas such as CO2 will lead to a further reduction in OLR.»

«The models also showed that modest global warming may produce a higher CH4 emission, but that this effect may be reversed by larger increases in temperature, due to the effect of soil moisture depletion.»

Number two, the global warming is now large enough that we can ascribe, with a high degree of confidence, a cause - and - effect relationship to the greenhouse effect.

A stronger solar effect on the climate would also imply a significantly larger solar contribution to the 20th century global warming, as demonstrated in some works (Scafetta 2009, 2013a, b, c).

I would note that because the issue of politics is a large one on the topic, a great deal of scientists (addressed with the drama effect discussion a little) might studiously avoid quantification, or even mentioning «global warming» or «global climate change» so as not to get dragged into defending their paper on a political, rather than scientific basis.

Among other things, the authors state that [1] «scientists do not know how large the greenhouse effect is, whether it will lead to a harmful amount of global warming, or (if it will) what should be done about it» (p. 560); [2] that «profound disagreements» about global warming exist within the scientific community (p. 560); [3] that so - called «activist scientists» say that the earth's climate is warming (p. 560); [4] that «science doesn't know whether we are experiencing a dangerous level of global warming or how bad the greenhouse effect Is, if it exists at all» (p. 569); [5] and that global warming is «enmeshed in scientific uncertainty» (p. 573).

Deserts may play a large role in alleviating the effects of global warming.

Presidents from 319 + Universities and Colleges We, the undersigned presidents and chancellors of colleges and universities, are deeply concerned about the unprecedented scale and speed of global warming and its potential for large - scale, adverse health, social, economic and ecological effects.

The obvious ethical restrictions to releasing large amounts of methane (which contributes 25 times more greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide) into the ocean has complicated study of how seepage of natural gas at the ocean floor contributes to global warming.

There's always an irony or two in the daily news, and today is no exception: Greenland, the world's largest island, is suffering from the effects of global warming at about twice the rate of the rest of the globe (except for

I had seen a very interesting interview, I think it was with Matt Lauer, where he was talking to a physicist who was postulating that much of the severe weather is an after - effect of global warming - that is to say, a large increase in moisture in the atmosphere.

Note: LOTI provides a more realistic representation of the global mean trends than dTs below; it slightly underestimates warming or cooling trends, since the much larger heat capacity of water compared to air causes a slower and diminished reaction to changes; dTs on the other hand overestimates trends, since it disregards most of the dampening effects of the oceans that cover about two thirds of the Earth's surface.

The global effects of a warmer and expanded IPWP is the subject of much research with a large team investigating it right now.

Many fluorinated gases have very high global warming potentials (GWPs) relative to other greenhouse gases, so small atmospheric concentrations can have proportionately large effects on global temperatures.