Sentences with phrase «ocean mass very»

Not exact matches

«It's very cool, because water can go underground, it can move around the ocean, it can change from ice to liquid and runoff, but it can't hide its mass from us,» says Watkins.

«Starting back in the 1960s, for various reasons people claimed there was very little continental mass, and so there wasn't enough weathering to affect the chemistry of the ocean.

«What is most interesting is that there are big shifts in the surface mass balance that occur from only very small changes in radiative forcing,» said Ullman, who is in OSU's College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences.

«The lineage has been around for hundreds of millions of years, but without the mass extinction event 66 million years ago, it is very likely that the oceans wouldn't be dominated by the fish we see today.»

The extent of the ice in the Arctic has always been very uncertain but, through this work, we show how the sea ice in the Arctic Ocean developed before all the land - based ice masses in the Northern Hemisphere were established,» Jochen Knies explains.

Under all RCP scenarios the rate of sea level rise will very likely exceed that observed during 1971 — 2010 due to increased ocean warming and increased loss of mass from glaciers and ice sheets.

then would increase the heat flow atmosphere - > ocean, leading to lower (dynamic) equilibrium temperature in the atmosphere which of course occurs very fast, as the thermal mass of the atmosphere is very low compared to the net energy throughput.

# 192 «For example a strengthening of wind over some oceanic region http://web.science.unsw.edu.au/~matthew/nclimate2106-incl-SI.pdf then would increase the heat flow atmosphere - > ocean, leading to lower (dynamic) equilibrium temperature in the atmosphere which of course occurs very fast, as the thermal mass of the atmosphere is very low compared to the net energy throughput.»

This is because so far much of the added warmth has been absorbed by the ocean, which warms very slowly due to its enormous mass.

It stands to reason that the oceans haven't been that warm in a while but since the average temperature of the whole mass of water is so dependent on circulation (it's only the surface temperature that's constrained by its interactions with the atmosphere and space), I suppose a plausible history of that particular value would be very hard to reconstruct.

Anthropogenic forcing, resulting in thermal expansion from ocean warming and glacier mass loss, has very likely contributed to sea level rise during the latter half of the 20th century.

They have to be quick to react, because different masses of water are often very different in salinity, pH, DIC, and alkalinity... if the ocean creatures couldn't adapt very quickly to the shock of some storm - or current - driven new water mass coming through the area where they live, they'd have gone extinct millennia ago.

bozzza - The differences in the Arctic are perhaps 1/4 the ocean thermal mass as global ocean averages, small overall size (the smallest ocean), being almost surrounded by land (which warms faster), more limited liquid interchanges due to bottlenecking than the Antarctic, and very importantly considerable susceptibility to positive albedo feedbacks; as less summer ice is present given current trends, solar energy absorbed by the Arctic ocean goes up very rapidly.

The mass balance is a very solid argument, as what is emitted by humans doesn't disappear by magic and is added to the atmosphere, even if one second later some of the human CO2 is absorbed by plants or by the oceans, that is at the cost of natural CO2 which should have been used instead.

«It is very likely that the rate of global mean sea level rise during the 21st century will exceed the rate observed during 1971 — 2010 for all Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios due to increases in ocean warming and loss of mass from glaciers and ice sheets.

Interestingly enough, if you correct that first graph in this post for seasonal effects (you know, plants growing in the spring, dying off in the fall), and the fact that about half (by mass balance) of our emissions are absorbed by ocean and plant sinks, those two lines will track each other very well.

Tomorrow we'll pay attention to that very interesting new study about clouds — a bombshell we think — but today we have another one that should serve as a foundation to scientific thinking about climate forcing, namely the suggestion that «not all climate forcers are equal» — equal in the way they act as a cooling or warming force, considering important factors like time scale and the geographical characteristics of a planet with a 3D atmosphere and a northern hemisphere with land masses and a southern hemisphere with just mainly a lot of oceans.

«Combining the evidence from ocean warming and mass loss of glaciers we conclude that it is very likely that there is a substantial contribution from anthropogenic forcing to the global mean sea level rise since the 1970s.»

Given the ocean's huge thermal mass, it takes a very long time to warm it up.

The extent of the ice in the Arctic has always been very uncertain but, through this work, we show how the sea ice in the Arctic Ocean developed before all the land - based ice masses in the Northern Hemisphere were established,» Jochen Knies explains.

Elevated sea temperatures drive impacts such as mass coral bleaching and mortality (very high confidence), with an analysis of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) ensemble projecting the loss of coral reefs from most sites globally by 2050 under mid to high rates of ocean warming (very likely).

I said: - 3oC warmer oceans = mass reef death - 3oC warmer earth = very large sea level rise - acidic oceans are threat to marine life You say this is only based on models.

I'd call Arctic sea ice mass a drop in the bucket compared to ocean volume but that's not accurate unless it's a very big bucket.

Indeed, the combination of a 10 degree temperature rise and the ocean acidification from the increased CO2 levels that a 10 degree rise implies, could very well lead to the mass extinction of most life on Earth.

However, the thermal mass of the troposphere is very small compared to the thermal mass of the oceans so it would seem that it would take a long time for the ocean temperature to increase in a significant manner by this method.

«I» say that because of my steadily reducing concentration of left - over physical mass, as it / I drifted lazily through the Trent - Severn Waterway System, into Lake Ontario and thereafter down the Saint Lawrence River and out into the oceans, that after a few decades I would finally have been a member of the very few who have travelled the world... for free!