Sentences with phrase «stratospheric temperature»

Radiative forcing is called instantaneous if no change in stratospheric temperature is accounted for.»

Since 1979 the Stratospheric sounding units (SSUs) on the NOAA operational satellites provided near global stratospheric temperature data above the lower stratosphere.

-- ozone is a strong driver of stratospheric temperature variations and ozone concentrations are not constant — the variation of the stratospheric temperature is different on different altitudes — in the 60 - 80 the tropospheric temperatures went down but the stratospheric temperatures didn't go up.

This causes stratospheric temperature differences which drives planetary waves / jet stream position / rain / clouds more to higher latitudes.

The spatial distribution of tropospheric and stratospheric temperature trends for 1979 to 2005 was examined, based on radiances from satellite - borne microwave sounding units that were processed with state - of - the - art retrieval algorithms.

Cartoon comparing (a) Fi, instantaneous forcing, (b) Fa, adjusted forcing, which allows stratospheric temperature to adjust, (c) Fg, fixed Tg forcing, which allows atmospheric temperature to adjust, (d) Fs, fixed SST forcing, which allows atmospheric temperature and land temperature to adjust, and (e) DTs, global surface air temperature calculated by the climate model in response to the climate forcing agent.»

You tried to explain away the problem for your theory (insignificant solar influence) caused by the stratospheric temperature trend apparently usually going in the opposite direction to that of the higher levels but so far have failed to do so.

I am not aware of any non solar influence on stratospheric temperature trends that has reversed it's effect sice the mid 90s which is around the time that solar cycle 23 started showing general weakening compared to the previous several cycles.

There has been a long - term [i.e. not solar cycle related] change in stratospheric temperature, attributed to chemical composition changes [and Global Warming, even]

That would be fine and I would have accepted it had there not been a return to a slight warming trend since the mid 90s which is unlikely to have happened if the cause of the downward stratospheric temperature trend were other than solar.

The source of the difference in mean lapse rate feedback between the two studies is unclear, but may relate to inappropriate inclusion of stratospheric temperature response in some feedback analyses (Soden and Held, 2006).

It is shown that an analytical equation derived from the CRE theory reproduces well 11 - year cyclic variations of polar O3 loss and stratospheric cooling, and new statistical analyses of the CRE equation with observed data of total O3 and stratospheric temperature give high linear correlation coefficients ≥ 0.92.

And again to be clear, the attribution for that new lower stratospheric temperature is increased atmospheric CO2 concentration.

In the case of lower stratospheric temperature, those big «knocks» correspond of course to the Chinchon and Pinatubo eruptions.»

If you look at the the lower stratospheric temperature, you do see a large positive temperature perturbation immediately after the volcanic eruption (this is expected of course), but rather than returning to the same relatively constant temperature, it shifts to a new, lower temperature operating point.

We perform a multimodel detection and attribution study with climate model simulation output and satellite - based measurements of tropospheric and stratospheric temperature change.

We use CO2 [87] and CH4 [88] data from Antarctic ice cores (figure 5a) to calculate an effective GHG forcing as follows: 5.2 where Fa is the adjusted forcing, i.e. the planetary energy imbalance due to the GHG change after the stratospheric temperature has time to adjust to the gas change.

perturbations of ozone in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, which challenge the manner in which the stratospheric temperature adjustment is done; and

Here's my explanation: there's little heat flow from convection across the tropopause, so stratospheric temperature is governed by its radiative balance.

Simply put, stratospheric temperature is maintained by concentrations of ozone.

The stratospheric temperature is driven by the daily energy the Earth gets from the Sun as dictated by the distance the Earth is from the Sun.

Perhaps predictable + / - Relative global mean stratospheric temperature?

No: We perform a multimodel detection and attribution study with climate model simulation output and satellite - based measurements of tropospheric and stratospheric temperature change.

Even worse, the paper's authors concluded «the new data call into question our understanding of observed stratospheric temperature trends and our ability to test simulations of the stratospheric response to emissions of greenhouse gases and ozone - depleting substances.»

Did they discuss the implications of this paper - The mystery of recent stratospheric temperature trends — during their one - week IPCC lead author meeting?

Stratospheric temperature (purple line) and west - to - east winds (gray line) from July 2017 - March 2018 at about 20 miles altitude (10 hPa) and 60 ° N.

Stratospheric temperature is driven by ozone content and UV.

For example, if it turns out that sensitivity to solar forcing is greater than estimated, sensitivity to CO2 is likely to be greater even though tropospheric and stratospheric temperature vary in opposite directions.

This is the period of the year when stratospheric temperature in the northern hemsiphere varies most strongly.

There is certainly a strong relationship between stratospheric temperature in the Arctic and sea surface temperature in the tropics of the southern hemisphere so I imagine it works the other way too.

Stratospheric temperature increases in response to ozone and declines in response to CO2.

That is no longer tenable because CO2 has continued to rise but the stratospheric temperature trend has changed.

The number of particles that form, and therefore the amount of chemical ozone destruction, is extremely sensitive to small changes in stratospheric temperature.

The World Climate Research Programme's Stratospheric Temperature Trends Assessment Panel (of which several authors of this study are members) has encouraged the scientists who generated the original Met Office data set to publish the methodology, but they are now retired.

However, human CO2 emissions have been increasing faster than ever since 1994 so why would the cooling stratospheric temperature trend have stopped?

Year - to - year variations in area and depth are caused by variations in stratospheric temperature and circulation.

where Te is the effective temperature (as defined by the absorbed solar radiation), Ts is the surface temperature, and Tt represents the stratospheric temperature that is being defined by the opaque spectral region.

Since Te does not change, it then follows that the stratospheric temperature change has to be a cooling effect in order to maintain SW / LW energy balance and to conserve energy.

First, for changing just CO2 forcing (or CH4, etc, or for a non-GHE forcing, such as a change in incident solar radiation, volcanic aerosols, etc.), there will be other GHE radiative «forcings» (feedbacks, though in the context of measuring their radiative effect, they can be described as having radiative forcings of x W / m2 per change in surface T), such as water vapor feedback, LW cloud feedback, and also, because GHE depends on the vertical temperature distribution, the lapse rate feedback (this generally refers to the tropospheric lapse rate, though changes in the position of the tropopause and changes in the stratospheric temperature could also be considered lapse - rate feedbacks for forcing at TOA; forcing at the tropopause with stratospheric adjustment takes some of that into account; sensitivity to forcing at the tropopause with stratospheric adjustment will generally be different from sensitivity to forcing without stratospheric adjustment and both will generally be different from forcing at TOA before stratospheric adjustment; forcing at TOA after stratospehric adjustment is identical to forcing at the tropopause after stratospheric adjustment).

Rather, as opacity increases due to increased CO2 or other ghgs, the stratospheric temperature deviates more and more from the radiating temperature in the stratosphere for the opaque region.

(On Earth, the stratosphere is transparent in the vicinity of the CO2 band, so that, given the shape of the CO2 band, increases in CO2 will increase the total LW downward flux at the tropopause for a wide variety of stratospheric temperature profiles.)

Before the response of the surface + troposphere, what allows stratospheric cooling is the TOA forcing being less than the tropopause - level forcing; both are affected by the stratospheric temperature profile.

Nevertheless, the contrasting behavior of the spectrally grey atmosphere, and of the atmosphere with the transparent spectral window, provides a clear indication of how the existence of a transparent spectral window decouples the stratospheric temperature from having to maintain (all by itself) the global energy balance set by the effective temperature Te.

With a GHG increase, say doubling of CO2, upon reaching equilibrium there will be a surface temperature increase by dTs, and a change in the stratospheric temperature by an amount dTt.

This would tend to reduce the potential for TOA forcing even more, leading to more stratospheric cooling in response to an increase in CO2; however, the presence of such a substance would itself make the inital stratospheric temperature warmer than otherwise.

CORRECTION however, the presence of such a substance would itself make the inital stratospheric temperature warmer than otherwise.

http://strat-www.met.fu-berlin.de/products/cdrom/html/section4.html#section4-2 QUOTE 4.2 SPARC Stratospheric Temperature Trend Assessment (STTA)(Ramaswamy et al., 2001)

And this one does graph trend lines for polar stratospheric temperature that on average over recent years would correlate to the trend line for area for PSCs in the article being discussed:

Another confirmation test would be to use a time series of stratospheric temperature as a proxy in this regard, since the stratosphere warms at volcanic eruption peaks due to the absorption of longwave radiation from below and also near - IR absorption.

The figure below shows the lower stratospheric temperature results from climate models using both all forcings and natural forcings only from 1880 to 2012.