Sentences with phrase «slow global warming means»

As Henrik alluded, our progress, or lack thereof, to slow global warming means should only be evaluated by atmospheric accumulation.

Not exact matches

It found the rapid pace of global warming and the slow pace of coral growth meant the reef was unlikely to evolve quickly enough to survive the level of climate change predicted in the next few decades.

«Our findings mean that nature is not as efficient in slowing global warming as we previously thought,» said Kees Jan van Groenigen, research fellow at the Center for Ecosystem Science and Society at NAU and lead author of the study.

What it means: Unlike the Kyoto Protocol — a 1997 climate pact that sought to force specific pollution reductions on certain countries, but failed to do virtually anything to slow global warming — the hoped - for Paris agreement would see nations taking voluntary steps to stem greenhouse gas pollution.

They then looked at what that meant for the temperature rise over the coming few decades, and found that global warming this century will indeed be slower than thought.

«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.»

According to the submitted paper, they «fit each record [ENSO and AMO times series] separately to 5th order polynomials using a linear least - squares regression; we subtracted the respective fits... This procedure effectively removes slow changes such as global warming and the ~ 70 year cycle of the AMO, and gives each record zero mean.»

But this does not mean that global warming has slowed down or even stopped.

Those concerned about global warming (including at least one study author) are stressing that a longer evolutionary timeline implies the bears» adaptation to climate change in the past was a slow process (meaning the speed of change now poses new threats).

Slowing the rate of global warming means reducing fossil fuel use and halting tropical deforestation; that will give people more time to adapt to our destabilized climate, «using whatever means available.»

DK12 used ocean heat content (OHC) data for the upper 700 meters of oceans to draw three main conclusions: 1) that the rate of OHC increase has slowed in recent years (the very short timeframe of 2002 to 2008), 2) that this is evidence for periods of «climate shifts», and 3) that the recent OHC data indicate that the net climate feedback is negative, which would mean that climate sensitivity (the total amount of global warming in response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels, including feedbacks) is low.

This finding, announced in September by the EU Joint Research Center and the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, doesn't mean that the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has yet decreased, but it could mean that we may be able to meet the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement in slowing global warming.

By the year 2070, however, researchers found that the warming would nearly catch up to the reference simulation, which means that a future grand solar minimum would merely slow down global warming.

From 1998 to 2013, the rate of global mean surface warming slowed, which some call the «global warming hiatus.»

Many agricultural regions warm at a rate that is faster than the global mean surface temperature (including oceans) but slower than the mean land surface temperature, leading to regional warming that exceeds 0.5 °C between the +1.5 and +2.0 °C Worlds.

Santer et al. also debunked the «skeptic» myths that global warming is just due to internal variability, and that a short - term slowing in the rate of warming means global warming has magically stopped.

This might not come as a surprise, as only some GOP politicians accept that global warming — which a carbon tax is meant to slow — is real.

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).

If you believe, as I do, that radiative forcing tends to cause global mean temperature increase, then it is a contradiction to believe that future rates of warming will be higher when increases of radiative forcing are slower than they were in the past.

While the IPCC reports of 2007 were praised for their recognition of the causes of global warming, the slow, consensus - based nature of the process, meant more recent data was not included.

The study refutes a claim that the planet's mean surface - temperature increases began to slow down in 1998, commonly referred to as a global warming «hiatus» phenomenon.

The relatively slow response of glaciers to global warming means it will take to the end of the century — and beyond — to see the benefits of mitigation efforts in the coming decades, the study says.

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.

In order to separate the simulations into those that warm faster and those that warm slower under a given forcing, we used an increase in global mean temperature of 4 °C relative to preindustrial as an indicator.

The «note» you refer to goes: «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.»

A recent study by the International Energy Agency says relying on gas would lead to a CO2e level of 650 ppm, meaning 4 °C global warming from fast feedbacks alone (and 4 °C is surely enough to set off slow feedbacks causing far more warming after this century).