Sentences with phrase «negative atmospheric effects»

And come to conclude that we really ought to listen to, and learn from, all the things that professionals of the natural sciences are telling the world about the negative atmospheric effects of our insistence on burning fossil fuels.

Not exact matches

Climate change's negative effects on plants will likely outweigh any gains from elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide levels

At a recent conference, scientists explained how a major atmospheric circulation known as the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) was in a negative phase at the onset of the LIA, which amplified the cooling effect of a reduction in solar irradiance and volcanic activity.

The poetic narration, while lyrical, has a distancing effect, but that's not necessarily a negative in this context: What results is a highly artistic, atmospheric and deftly - written cat - and - mouse game.

ANY conclusions vis a vis a change in a trace atmospheric gas, that itself has both positive and negative effects on Earth's climate are hard to analyze yet — another 100 years of satellite data will help correct that!

While the global warmmongers continue to wring their hands over rising temperatures hurting yields (the Corn Belt growing season has indeed warmed slightly since 1960), improved varieties and the «global greening» benefits of more atmospheric CO2 have more than offset any negative weather effects — if those even exist.

However, I am not a «warmista» by any means — we do not know how to properly quantify the albedo of aerosols, including clouds, with their consequent negative feedback effects in any of the climate sensitivity models as yet — and all models in the ensemble used by the «warmistas» are indicating the sensitivities (to atmospheric CO2 increase) are too high, by factors ranging from 2 to 4: which could indicate that climate sensitivity to a doubling of current CO2 concentrations will be of the order of 1 degree C or less outside the equatorial regions (none or very little in the equatorial regions)- i.e. an outcome which will likely be beneficial to all of us.

The prominent upward trend in the GM precipitation occurring in the last century and the notable strengthening of the global monsoon in the last 30 yr (1961 — 90) appear unprecedented and are due possibly in part to the increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, though the authors» simulations of the effects from recent warming may be overestimated without considering the negative feedbacks from aerosols.

The authors however believe a positive AO and NAO leads to atmospheric wave train patterns which may have delayed opposite effects — leading to a negative AO and NAO later on in the season — and that is where especially associated European cold spells would originate from.

Meanwhile, the logarithmic effect of CO2 is excellent «concession» to make in the rhetorical sense, since it concedes the obvious state of our knowledge about the effects of CO2, while at the same time providing us with the solid argument that even if we double atmospheric CO2 levels from 400ppm to 800 ppm over the next 100 years the largest amount of warming possible — assuming all else remains the same and Gaia has no homeostasis negative feedback systems which tend to moderate any runaway trends — is 1.2 c.

Although some researchers have raised concerns about possible negative effects of rising CO2 on ocean surface pH, there are several lines of evidence demonstrating marine ecosystems are far more sensitive to fluxes of carbon dioxide from ocean depths and the biosphere's response than from invasions of atmospheric CO2.

With all of the negative effects predicted to occur in response to the ongoing rise in the air's carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration — a result of burning fossil fuels to produce energy — it is only natural to want to see what has been happening to our Earth's many ecosystems as the atmospheric carbon dioxide load has risen.

The significance of the atmospheric greenhouse effect seems to have been grossly overstated by ignoring the negative convective and radiative factors and leaving the oceans out of the equation.

«This H2O negative - feedback effect on CO2 is ignored in models that assume that warm moist air does not rise and form sunlight - reflecting clouds, but remains as humid air near sea level, absorbing infrared radiation from the sun, and approximately doubling the temperature rises predicted from atmospheric CO2 increases.

Altogether, therefore, common sense suggests that with the plant productivity gains that result from the aerial fertilization effect of the ongoing rise in atmospheric CO2, plus its transpiration - reducing effect that boosts plant water use efficiency, along with its stress - alleviating effect that lessens the negative growth impacts of resource limitations and environmental constraints, the world's vegetation possesses an ideal set of abilities to reap a tremendous benefit from what the President inaccurately terms «carbon pollution» in the years and decades to come.

For one thing the two negative forcings cancel out much or most of the additional warming from the atmospheric CO2 and for another the atmospheric warming effect is miniscule in relation to the oceanic warming effect.

I know many clever scientists have produced figures calculating the heat budget of the atmospheric greenhouse effect but the value to be fixed to the convective process as a negative forcing has not been adequately quantified as far as I know.

As far as atmospheric physics is concerned H2O provides ample negative feedbacks to the the addition of CO2 so as to trivialize any effect on climate.

We're used to thinking about the negative effects of rising CO2 levels on the climate, but some new research shows that indoor CO2 levels, often higher than the atmospheric levels, can impair cognition.

Our mission is to educate the public on the positive effects of additional atmospheric CO2 and help prevent the inadvertent negative impact to human, plant and animal life if we reduce CO2.