Sentences with phrase «reduced warming since»

geez sunshine you do nt seem to realize that reducing the warming since 1945 actually reinforces the IPCC attribution statement... if there's less warming then CO2 caused a higher % of it.

Not exact matches

Since, even now, when debates about the fact of global warming is largely over, no nation is considering taking the really drastic actions that might significantly reduce the catastrophes that lie ahead, it seems that we are all too likely to experience judgment for our collective sins.

In the particularly difficult question of global warming, thus far most economists have argued that it will be more efficient to respond to the problems caused by global warming as they occur than to make serious efforts to reduce it, since these efforts would slow economic growth.

Conservatives are, on the whole, more aligned with business and / or industry Since industry is most likely to be adversely affected by the consequences of regulations to reduce global warming (emissions restrictions, for example) there is an incentive to deny global warming.

The warming of the lake has reduced the suitable habitat for those species by 38 percent since the 1940s, the team found.

The study also concludes that, over a 15 - year period, cutting the black carbon produced by burning fossil fuels, vegetation, dung and other sources could reduce the warming the Earth has experienced since the Industrial Revolution — about 0.8 degrees Celsius — by 17 to 23 percent.

Singer, founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, concludes that since global warming would raise maximum summer temperatures modestly while raising winter minimum temperatures significantly, it «should help reduce human death rates.»

«Although the Earth has continued to warm during the temporary slowdown since around 2000, the reduced rate of warming in that period may have lulled us into a false sense of security.

And since mitigation reduces the rate as well as the magnitude of warming, it also increases the time available for adaptation to a particular level of climate change, potentially by several decades.

In their new Conservation Genetics paper, the researchers say, «Past gene flow also suggests that human - assisted gene flow is necessary to conserve the ecosystem services associated with predation, since climate warming has reduced the frequency of ice bridges and with it the only opportunity for unassisted gene flow.

At least two studies published since 2010 — one report from the United Nations Environment Programme in 2011 and a follow - up published in Science last year — suggested that significantly reducing the emissions of soot and methane could trim human - caused warming by at least 0.5 °C (0.9 ° F) by 2050, compared with an increase of about 1 °C if those emissions continued unabated.

Since the UHI effect is reduced in windy conditions, if the UHI effect was a significant component of the temperature record, then we would see a different rate of warming when observations are stratified by calm or windy conditions.

So here's what I do: sometime after waking but before eating breakfast, I warm a pint of water (slightly warmer than body temperature but not hot), juice half a lemon directly in the glass using a wooden citrus reamer, and top it off with a few sprinkles of non-irradiated cayenne pepper (since, again, the process of irradiation reduces the nutritional profile and natural medicinal properties of herbs and spices, and we don't want that!).

Please my problem is, am slim and is it good for me to drink warm lemon water since it help in reducing weight and I don't wont to loss my weight please advice.

In particular the PDO cycle index peaks at a warm phase about 1985 and has been reducing since then.

Therefore, IMHO, it would be closer to the truth to call WUWT a «skeptic» site that calls into question exactly how much the mean temperature has increased since the advent of the thermometer record in the late 1880's, how much of that is due to human activities and how much to natural cycles not under our control, what dangers rising temperatures may pose to human life and civilization, and what technologically and politically doable actions may be taken to reduce human - caused warming, and our dependence on foreign sources of fossil energy.

[1] CO2 absorbs IR, is the main GHG, human emissions are increasing its concentration in the atmosphere, raising temperatures globally; the second GHG, water vapor, exists in equilibrium with water / ice, would precipitate out if not for the CO2, so acts as a feedback; since the oceans cover so much of the planet, water is a large positive feedback; melting snow and ice as the atmosphere warms decreases albedo, another positive feedback, biased toward the poles, which gives larger polar warming than the global average; decreasing the temperature gradient from the equator to the poles is reducing the driving forces for the jetstream; the jetstream's meanders are increasing in amplitude and slowing, just like the lower Missippi River where its driving gradient decreases; the larger slower meanders increase the amplitude and duration of blocking highs, increasing drought and extreme temperatures — and 30,000 + Europeans and 5,000 plus Russians die, and the US corn crop, Russian wheat crop, and Aussie wildland fire protection fails — or extreme rainfall floods the US, France, Pakistan, Thailand (driving up prices for disk drives — hows that for unexpected adverse impacts from AGW?)

This reduces the observed warming since 2011 (the start of their forecast period) to the end of the data curve from 0.34 to 0.22 °C.

Since it appears it is we humans who are contributing to the global warming phenomina, why not reduce the number of humans in order to control the issue.

Since, on average, aerosols have a cooling effect (although some absorbing aerosols like black carbon (soot) are actually adding to global warming), reducing current aerosol levels (particularly sulphates) is equivalent to an extra warming effect.

That may undo some of the warming already done and likewise reduce the amount in the pipeline (since it will reduce before it appears).

That altitude is cooler than was the earlier radiating altitude (hence the reduced escape via the CO2 wavelengths), but it is warmer than the new altitude was before the CO2 addition, since previously, the new altitude was not the radiating altitude but above it.

since it is being caused by global warming from carbon dioxide, the way to stop it, and prevent sea level rise, would be to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere.

Since most of these safety devices use the global warming gas CO2 in small cartridges for inflation, I am wondering if there's any way we can reduce climate change by all have lots of personal airbags, everywhere.

I ask this since the latest study I have read indicates that global warming would actually reduce power of hurricanes and cyclones since there would be less sheer between cold and warm air.

These plants are actually worse for global warming than the dirty ones, since you can't scrub CO2, and the dimming effect of the particulates is reduced.

With fourteen of the fifteen warmest years on record having occurred since the year 2000; with oceans both warming and acidifying; and with unequivocal scientific evidence that burning fossil fuels is the principal cause — what can we do to rapidly reduce emissions?

If so, this is one way in which global warming may end up causing a decrease in Atlantic hurricane activity over the coming decades, since the increased wind shear over the Atlantic during El Niño events greatly reduces the number and intensity of these storms.»

Although APS plans to reduce its coal burn from the current 35 % to 17 % by 2029, by increasing its natural gas burn from 19 % to 35 %, it will actually increase its greenhouse gas emissions in the near term, since the global warming potential from methane, which is leaked at multiple points of the natural gas supply chain, is 86 times that of carbon over 20 years, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2013 report.

For policy - makers, the speed of climate change over the coming decades matters as much as the total long - term change, since this rate of change will determine whether human societies and natural ecosystems will be able to adapt fast enough to survive.New results indicate a warming rate of about 2.5 C per century over the coming decades (assuming no attempt is made to reduce GHG emissions).

Examples: Since leaves function more efficiently in diffuse light than in dappled bright - or - dark direct light, clearer skies will reduce carbon uptake: Mercado et al. (2009); a multi-year study of grass found carbon uptake sharply decreased in hotter summers: Arnone et al. (2008); warming kills plankton, resulting in less emission of DMS and thus less cooling clouds: Six et al. (2013); changes in Arctic rivers and coastlines could bring more carbon loss than models anticipated: Abbott et al. (2016).

The sheaf of explanations for the apparent slight slowdown of surface warming since 1998, relative to the previous two decades, all help to reduce «noise» by assigning explicit mechanisms to previously - unexplained variation.

In SW — seen here as a cloud cover — a warming trend from reducing cloud between the mid 1980's and 1990's equivalent to about 2 W / m ^ 2 change, a step change in the late 1990's in the 1998/2001 climate shift and a plateauing since.

The combination of these two points substantially reduces the confidence that we should place in attribution statements of warming since 1950.

It has been recorded since the 1960s in terms of both rising ocean temperature and rising acidity, both of which reduce the capacity to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, thereby advancing AGW and further ocean warming.

C02 has little effect; late 20th century warming was largely a heat lag effect from solar activity, combined with a positive PDO; (this also fits perfectly with the pause since the late 1990s, which was not predicted using AGW); with currently a negative PDO and reduced solar activity, which means temperature will stay flat or go down to at least 2035, with the solar activitylikely remaining low.

My suspicion is that there is a bias in interpretation of XBT data to maintain the idea that the warming of the upper ocean since 1976 is due to increased co2, and the rescaling of XBT data works to reduce the impact of the ARGO data, which shows a «slight cooling» according to Craig Loehle and Josh WIllis (before his arm was twisted), and only a very slight increase according to Levitus 2010.

If warming stopped, or even slowed down, since 1997 then it would have reduced the warming trend.

There essentially has been no global warming in North America since the 1940s, the oceans have been cooling for years — the elderly could be reduced to burning books in the UK to stay warm this winter for all we know — and, some scientists believe the current period of global cooling may last 20 - 30 years.

Kauffman, et al hypothesize that the relative slowdown in warming between 1998 — 2008 compared to the entire period since 1953 is due to three factors, including reduced incoming solar radiation («insolation») and La Nina.

England and his colleagues calculated that the stronger trade winds have reduced the global average surface temperature by 0.1 - 0.2 degrees Celsius (0.18 - 0.36 degrees Fahrenheit)-- enough, they write, «to account for much of the hiatus in surface warming observed since 2001.»

If the «pause» is causing climate scientists to question the reliability of the climate models, then this should have led the IPCC authors to reduce their confidence in their claim that most of the global warming since the 1950s was man - made.

Since UHI definitely reduces DTR, by warming nights more than days, you need a really bad method to fail to correlate the two.

These omissions included: (a) the lack of recognition that dependence on natural gas as a bridge fuel for reducing the US carbon footprint raises several ethical questions, a matter reviewed here in detail, (b) acknowledgment of the US special responsibility for climate change for its unwillingness to take action on climate change for over 20 years since it ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, see, The World Waits In Vain For US Ethical Climate Change Leadership As the World Warms, and, (c) failing to communicate the extreme urgency of quickly and significantly reducing ghg emissions in the next few years to give the world any hope of avoiding dangerous climate change, see, On the Extraordinary Urgency of Nations Responding To Climate Change on the Basis of Equity.

A greenhouse warming may reduce the 1,500 - year cycle aspects, but this provides us with no comfort regarding future prospects since a warming can shortcut the usual circuit, bypassing the usual stage - setting by amplification of the 1,500 - year cycle.

In this Problem or what we call the Global warming we have many solutions first Reduce emissions Since people are causing global warming, people can mitigate global warming, if they act in time.

Thawing permafrost also delivers organic - rich soils to lake bottoms, where decomposition in the absence of oxygen releases additional methane.116 Extensive wildfires also release carbon that contributes to climate warming.107, 117,118 The capacity of the Yukon River Basin in Alaska and adjacent Canada to store carbon has been substantially weakened since the 1960s by the combination of warming and thawing of permafrost and by increased wildfire.119 Expansion of tall shrubs and trees into tundra makes the surface darker and rougher, increasing absorption of the sun's energy and further contributing to warming.120 This warming is likely stronger than the potential cooling effects of increased carbon dioxide uptake associated with tree and shrub expansion.121 The shorter snow - covered seasons in Alaska further increase energy absorption by the land surface, an effect only slightly offset by the reduced energy absorption of highly reflective post-fire snow - covered landscapes.121 This spectrum of changes in Alaskan and other high - latitude terrestrial ecosystems jeopardizes efforts by society to use ecosystem carbon management to offset fossil fuel emissions.94, 95,96

Both wetland drying and the increased frequency of warm dry summers and associated thunderstorms have led to more large fires in the last ten years than in any decade since record - keeping began in the 1940s.9 In Alaskan tundra, which was too cold and wet to support extensive fires for approximately the last 5,000 years, 105 a single large fire in 2007 released as much carbon to the atmosphere as had been absorbed by the entire circumpolar Arctic tundra during the previous quarter - century.106 Even if climate warming were curtailed by reducing heat - trapping gas (also known as greenhouse gas) emissions (as in the B1 scenario), the annual area burned in Alaska is projected to double by mid-century and to triple by the end of the century, 107 thus fostering increased emissions of heat - trapping gases, higher temperatures, and increased fires.

The second hypothesis is that ENSO is responsible for the slowdown since it magnified the warming over the first half of the pause and reduced it over the last half.

Since a sustainable future based on the continued extraction of coal, oil and gas in the «business - as - usual mode» will not be possible because of both resource depletion and environmental damages (as caused, e.g., by dangerous sea level rise) we urge our societies to -LSB-...] Reduce the concentrations of warming air pollutants (dark soot, methane, lower atmosphere ozone, and hydrofluorocarbons) by as much as 50 % [and] cut the climate forcers that have short atmospheric lifetimes.