Sentences with phrase «resulting difference in temperature»

By your calculation, if we are able to reduce today's emission rate of by 50 % in the next 40 years (by 2050) to result in 450 ppm, then maintain that emission rate for the next 50 years (by 2100) to 500 ppm, the resulting difference in temperature would potentially be 2.2 deg C?

Not exact matches

«We found that development differences were due to moisture interacting with temperature where increased water content of the sand resulted in temperatures that were 2 to 3 degrees Celsius lower than air temperatures,» said Wyneken.

We now have to observe how the coma evolves as it nears the sun, to determine whether the changes in the coma are a result of temperature differences alone or whether the nucleus itself is inhomogeneous.»

It's probably tidally locked, meaning that it always presents the same face to the star, resulting in permanent day and night sides with huge differences in temperature.

These divergences suggest that there is still a lot of uncertainty surrounding satellite temperature records that needs to be resolved, as the range of reasonable assumptions for corrections can lead to large differences in results.

This decrease results because plant respiration also increases with temperature, and some of the photosynthetic gains (that lead to increased productivity) are lost through a) growth and maintenance respiration (Ryan et al. 1995), or b) seasonal differences between photosynthetic gains in the spring and increased respiration in the fall.

But... once the records are converted to anomalies relative to some baseline such as 1961 - 1990, there would be absolutely no difference in the results of the two approaches for global temperature anomalies!

And while there is variation between team results due to the differences in technique and measurement methods, one thing they all agree on: long term, temperatures are going up.

The carmaker explained that several factors can affect hybrid fuel economy more than regular gasoline engines, and among the differences highlighted were speed, as the difference between 75 mph and 65 mph can produce a 7 mpg difference in fuel economy; outside temperature, the difference between 40 °F and 70 °F can result in a 5 mpg difference; and vehicle break - in, the difference from 0 miles to 6,000 miles can be a 5 mpg difference.

11th pp: «His results were more consistent with temperature reconstructions if more traditional TSI estimates were used, with moderate difference between today and the Maunder Minimum, and that are in better agreement with the results presented in the recent IPCC report.»

I would expect greater resolution in the adjustments than that, and I can imagine different outcomes based on different textures and patterns in ship - buoy differences — if conditions, temperature, season, humidity, etc. have a systematic influence on the S - B difference, and this skews the mean difference in a way that affects our results.

is intended to give the impression that air temperature can make no difference, whereas we have seen that the results of [Moelg and Hardy, 2004] are compatible with several ways in which air temperature can affect ablation.

As far as I know, the 2 main sources of satellite data for temperatures in the lower troposphere are UAH and RSS, and they vastly differ in their trends in the tropical troposphere, with RSS's trend being twice as warming as the UAH trend, although they show the same trends in the remaining troposphere, resulting in a Global difference of only 0.035 C / d trend.

His results were more consistent with temperature reconstructions if more traditional TSI estimates were used, with moderate difference between today and the Maunder Minimum, and that are in better agreement with the results presented in the recent IPCC report.

Might be: «If more traditional TSI estimates were used, his results would be more consistent with temperature reconstructions, with moderate difference between today and the Maunder Minimum, and would be in better agreement with the results presented in the recent IPCC report.»

Your calculation describes how much difference in infrared radiational heating, dQ, results from a given increment of temperature change, assuming emissivity and everything else remain fixed.

Given that small difference you would have to have two boxes at the same time, not the same box at diffent times, cause normal variations in temperature from day to day would swamp your results.

If a doubling of CO2 resulted in a temperature increase of approximately 1 K before any non-Planck feedbacks (before water vapor, etc.), then assuming the same climate sensitivity to the total GHE, removing the whole GHE would result in about a (setting the TOA / tropopause distinction aside, as it is relatively small relative to the 155 W / m2 value) 155/3.7 * 1 K ~ = 42 K. Which is a bit more than 32 or 33 K, though I'm not surprised by the difference.

IMHO, the increase in speed of the Hadley / Walker cells may be the result of higher ocean temperatures (or temperature differences over long distances), not the origin (or to a lesser extent, as less clouds lead to some extra insolation, thus warming).

But... once the records are converted to anomalies relative to some baseline such as 1961 - 1990, there would be absolutely no difference in the results of the two approaches for global temperature anomalies!

The main post here uses the Box data under the assumption that temperature differences determined by the same method are likely to be correct in terms of relative position, but when compared to records determined by other methods there may be biases (possibly unknown) which distort the result.

Raw climate model results for a business - as - usual scenario indicate that we can expect global temperatures to increase anywhere in the range of 5.8 and 10.6 degrees Fahrenheit (3.2 to 5.9 degrees Celsius) over preindustrial levels by the end of the century — a difference of about a factor of two between the most - and least - severe projections.

Weather often occurs as a result of differences in temperature and pressure from one place to another.

A prominent (in the media, anyway) research study last year by Rutgers's Jennifer Francis and University of Wisconsin's Stephen Vavrus suggests that the declining temperature difference between the Arctic and the lower latitudes (adding greenhouse gases into the atmosphere warms colder, drier regions more so than warmer, wetter ones — with the notable exception of Antarctica) has led to changes in the jet stream which result in slower moving, and potentially stronger East Coast winter storm systems.

Reporting problems include differences due to the net result of conversions off low data metered at varying temperature and pressure bases and converted to a standard temperature and pressure base; the effect of variations in company accounting and billing practices; differences between billing cycle and calendar period time frames; and imbalances resulting from the merger of data reporting systems that vary in scope, format, definitions, and type of respondents.

* There is too much conflicting evidence about climate change to know whether it is actually happening * Current climate change is part of a pattern that has been going on for millions of years * Climate change is just a natural fluctuation in Earth's temperatures * Even if we do experience some consequences from climate change, we will be able to cope with them * The effects of climate change are likely to be catastrophic * The evidence for climate change is unreliable * There are a lot of very different theories about climate change and little agreement about which is right * Scientists have in the past changed their results to make climate change appear worse than it is * Scientists have hidden research that shows climate change is not serious * Climate change is a scam * Social / behavioural scepticism measures * Climate change is so complicated, that there is very little politicians can do about it * There is no point in me doing anything about climate change because no - one else is * The actions of a single person doesn't make any difference in tackling climate change * People are too selfish to do anything about climate change * Not much will be done about climate change, because it is not in human nature to respond to problems that won't happen for many years * It is already too late to do anything about climate change * The media is often too alarmist about climate change * Environmentalists do their best to emphasise the worst possible effects of climate change * Climate change has now become a bit of an outdated issue * Whether it is important or not, on a day - to - day basis I am bored of hearing about climate change

The overall level of consistency between attribution results derived from different models (as shown in Figure 9.9), and the ability of climate models to simulate large - scale temperature changes during the 20th century (Figures 9.5 and 9.6), indicate that such model differences are likely to have a relatively small impact on attribution results of large - scale temperature change at the surface.

On a seasonal basis the ranges between the daily maximum, minimum and average are all listed and the lowest ratio is that the daily minimum temperature range over the year is 77,000 times greater than the temperature difference that would result from the proposed 30 % reduction in emissions.

F which is 214,000 times greater than the temperature difference that would result from the proposed 30 % reduction in emissions.

The lowest ratio is for the minimum difference between the observed maximum and minimum temperatures and that is over 22,000 times greater than the temperature difference that would result from the proposed 30 % reduction in emissions.

There is concern in the scientific community that the temperature change from now to the end of the century will be roughly the same as the difference between now and the last Ice Age, which occurred 10,000 years ago, resulting in dramatic changes in temperature, weather patterns, water tables, land and biodiversity.

This logical deduction is based on the fact that there is nowhere on the Earths surface where the difference in the summer maximum and winter minimum temperatures is less than any temperature change resulting from the addition of «green house gasses».

Pat, the lag to which you allude, in fact, makes a minor but significant difference to «the result» (meaning the correlation between CO2 and temperature in the record), but whether or not it does is really very much beside the point.

«Four other groups have analysed the Earth's surface temperature and their results agree with our finding; the small differences in values and ranking are expected because of the small uncertainty in each group's results.»

Instead of this evidence showing that there is no UHI increase in the main temperature indices, an alternative explanation for the empirical evidence is that, for whatever reason, actual urban changes do not result in a material difference in trend for calm Tmin than for windy Tmin.

That is, you have to interpret Jelbring as using «temperature» not as we all learned it in connection with the Ideal Gas Law but rather as the quantity whose difference is by definition zero if no heat flow results — in a wire.

Heat is the transfer of energy from one body to another as a result of a difference in temperature, or a change of phase.

Also Wentz neglects the fact that small changes in relative humidity or difference between surface and near air temperatures can result in large changes in evaporation rates based on their equation (1) which determines evaporation rate.

The White House notes that «even small differences from seasonal average temperatures result in illness and death.

Heat is conducted depending temperature difference - the hotter the surface, results in more heat being conducted.

The range of model projections for each emissions scenario is the result of the differences in the ways the models represent key factors such as water vapor, ice and snow reflectivity, and clouds, which can either dampen or amplify the initial effect of human influences on temperature.

And while there is variation between team results due to the differences in technique and measurement methods, one thing they all agree on: long term, temperatures are going up.

The net result is that in the lower troposphere, the temperature difference between low and high latitudes decreases as the planet warms, creating less wind shear.

The danger in the current GW is not due to the difference between a stable climate at average 15oC (your current average temperature numbers are wrong) and a stable climate at average 20 or 22 or 25oC or what have you, it is due to the extremely rapid rate of change and the resulting instability and the loss of biodiversity.

Differences between temperature trends measured from different versions of tropospheric satellite data result primarily from differences in how data from different satellites Differences between temperature trends measured from different versions of tropospheric satellite data result primarily from differences in how data from different satellites differences in how data from different satellites are merged.

With different thickness of insulation, a fixed amount of heat flow results in a temperature difference proportional to the thickness.

An illustration of how meaningless the record and the results are is given by the fact that in many years the difference in global annual average temperature is at least half the 0.7 °C figure.

There seem to be inconsistencies in REA16 between different estimates of the bias resulting from use of the difference method and blended air and SST temperature data.

I've suggested in the past that the difference in min temperature readings might be a result of the station move rather than the instrument change, as many MMTS stations are located closer to buildings than their LiG predecessors.

The difference between modeled and observed TSI might be the result of underrepresented weak magnetic fields in the Carrington rotation synoptic charts, an uncertainty in the TSI measurement, or a decline of the global temperature of the photosphere.