Sentences with phrase «volcanic responses in»

I can't see any clear volcanic response in the curves shown in Enric Palle's presentation on the above URL.

Notice the volcanic response in the early 1990's and that satellite data is lower then giss data in general.

Not exact matches

«Egypt and the Nile are very sensitive instruments for climate change, and Egypt provides a unique historical laboratory in which to study social vulnerability and response to abrupt volcanic shocks,» says Manning.

The available data indicate that future global temperatures will continue to change primarily in response to ENSO cycling, volcanic activity and solar changes.»

Climate scientists have also attempted to estimate climate sensitivity based on the response to recent large volcanic eruptions, such as Mount Pinatubo in 1991.

[Response: «in the absence of other unknowns» — aerosol forcing, ocean heat uptake, internal variability, underestimates of solar and volcanic forcing... — gavin]

Constraining ECS from the observed responses to individual volcanic eruptions is difficult because the response to short - term volcanic forcing is strongly nonlinear in ECS, yielding only slightly enhanced peak responses and substantially extended response times for very high sensitivities (Frame et al., 2005; Wigley et al., 2005a).

The long timescales (even ignoring the «Earth system» responses like ice sheets and vegetation) are not easy to get at in the instrumental record or by studying «abrupt forcing» events like volcanic eruptions.

In response to the recent volcanic activity at Mount Agung in Karangasem regency, the Bali Hotels Association is reportedly working hand - in - hand with tourism stakeholders to take care of guests if the mountain eruptIn response to the recent volcanic activity at Mount Agung in Karangasem regency, the Bali Hotels Association is reportedly working hand - in - hand with tourism stakeholders to take care of guests if the mountain eruptin Karangasem regency, the Bali Hotels Association is reportedly working hand - in - hand with tourism stakeholders to take care of guests if the mountain eruptin - hand with tourism stakeholders to take care of guests if the mountain erupts.

In response to the recent volcanic activity at Mount Agung in Karangasem regency, the Bali Hotels As.In response to the recent volcanic activity at Mount Agung in Karangasem regency, the Bali Hotels As.in Karangasem regency, the Bali Hotels As...

The response of that model to volcanic forcings, the last ice age, changes in orbital parameters etc. are all «out - of - sample» tests that are not fixed by adjusting parameters.

You can show quite easily that without water - vapour feedbacks (for instance), you can not get a good match to volcanic forcings and responses in the real world (Soden et al, 2005), or to ENSO, or to the long term trends.

Climate models have passed a broad range of validation tests — e.g. a 30 - year warming trend, response to perturbations like ENSO and volcanic eruptions... On the other hand, in a statistical model, parameters of the model are determined by a fit to the model.

For those curious about the pronounced dips in the future scenarios here they are responses to Pinatubo - scale volcanic eruptions that are assumed to occur at a reasonable frequency over the course of the next century.

The interest in these records is for what they can tell us about natural variability, spatial patterns of change, responses to solar or volcanic forcing, teleconnections etc. — it's all interesting and useful, but it is nothing like as important as the outside interest shown in these studies might suggest.

gavin: You can show quite easily that without water - vapour feedbacks (for instance), you can not get a good match to volcanic forcings and responses in the real world (Soden et al, 2005)...

In fact, there is reasonably compelling evidence that changes in drought in the western U.S. over the past millennium may, in large part, reflect the forced response of ENSO to past volcanic and solar radiative forcinIn fact, there is reasonably compelling evidence that changes in drought in the western U.S. over the past millennium may, in large part, reflect the forced response of ENSO to past volcanic and solar radiative forcinin drought in the western U.S. over the past millennium may, in large part, reflect the forced response of ENSO to past volcanic and solar radiative forcinin the western U.S. over the past millennium may, in large part, reflect the forced response of ENSO to past volcanic and solar radiative forcinin large part, reflect the forced response of ENSO to past volcanic and solar radiative forcing.

The large volcanic forcing signal basically obliterates the far smaller solar forcing signal, which can not be isolated in the presence of noise and other forcings from this reconstruction, yielding the spurious apparent negative response to solar irradiance.

And yes, there is such evidence — in the predicted response to volcanic forcing, the ozone hole, orbital variations, the sun, paleo - lake outbursts, the response to ENSO etc. that all show models matching the observations skillfully (which is not to say they match perfectly).

The difference in response between Zorita et al (2004) and Crowley (2000) is that the forcings were significantly larger in ECHO - G (by a factor of 2 for solar, and with larger volcanic forcing as well).

Some model differences in the stratospheric response to e.g. volcanos may be related to how the volcanic forcing is represented in the model experiments.

See e.g. this review paper (Schmidt et al, 2004), where the response of a climate model to estimated past changes in natural forcing due to solar irradiance variations and explosive volcanic eruptions, is shown to match the spatial pattern of reconstructed temperature changes during the «Little Ice Age» (which includes enhanced cooling in certain regions such as Europe).

[Response: There's no question that volcanic eruptions under the ice could make a difference, but they'd have to be in the right place, and they aren't.

Secondly, the conclusion at this stage simply a hypothesis, a hypothesis that can account for these key enigmatic features in the actual tree - ring hemisphere temperature reconstruction: the attenuation, and the increasing (back in time) delay and temporal smearing of the cooling response to past volcanic forcing.

If the missing rings are real but vary by region then you should be able to do regional reconstructions that show dramatic responses to the volcanic events in some regions (that didn't miss), and much smaller response in others (where the ring was missed).

I think there is an important context here that is easy to lose in all of the emphasis on the thing that the trees don't appear to be doing well w / (i.e. the response to the high - frequency cooling events associated primarily with explosive volcanic eruptions): that's, the thing that the trees appear to be doing remarkably well with, i.e. capturing the long - term trends and low - frequency variability that is predicted by the climate model simulations.

[Response: As explained in the paper, it doesn't happen just for volcanic eruptions, but for any temperature excursion of more than about 1C relative to the reference period baseline.

As we have discussed several times elsewhere on this site, studies employing model simulations of the past millennium have been extremely successful in reproducing many of the details evident in paleoclimate reconstructions of this interval as a forced response of the climate to natural (primarly volcanic and solar) and in more recent centuries, anthropogenic, radiative changes.

Recently I have been looking at the climate models collected in the CMIP3 archive which have been analysed and assessed in IPCC and it is very interesting to see how the forced changes — i.e. the changes driven the external factors such as greenhouse gases, tropospheric aerosols, solar forcing and stratospheric volcanic aerosols drive the forced response in the models (which you can see by averaging out several simulations of the same model with the same forcing)-- differ from the internal variability, such as associated with variations of the North Atlantic and the ENSO etc, which you can see by looking at individual realisations of a particular model and how it differs from the ensemble mean.

There are various possible explanations for this discrepancy, but it is interesting to speculate that it could indicate that the models employed may have a basic inadequacy that does not allow a sufficiently strong AO response to large - scale forcing, and that this inadequacy could also be reflected in the simulated response to volcanic aerosol loading.

Volcanic eruptions and ENSO have a strong frequency component with a similar response amplitude in the same frequency bands, especially the 7 - 14 year band.

That is because there is some internal variability in temperature, because volcanic temperature responses are not commensurate with instaneous volcanic forcings due to thermal inertia, and because earlier forcings will have more fully worked through the system than will have later forcings.

If by observational data, you mean the amount of aerosols in the atmosphere, I think that would be a key piece of information that would need to be included in the models as without it the response to volcanic events can not be modeled or predicted.

If the real world's response to forcing changes was to amplify the forcing change the earth's temperature would widely oscillated in response to let's say a large volcanic eruption or other large temporary forcing change.

After a large volcanic eruption, the layer of sulfate aerosols in the stratosphere gets thicker, and we see, in the historic record, that the Earth cools down in response.

What Willis has proposed is a mechanism that may shed light on how the energy in El Niños collects in response to volcanic forcing.

Isostatic rebound in response to glacier retreat (unloading), increase in local salinity (i.e., δ18Osw), have been attributed to increased volcanic activity at the onset of Bølling — Allerød, are associated with the interval of intense volcanic activity, hinting at a interaction between climate and volcanism - enhanced short - term melting of glaciers, possibly via albedo changes from particle fallout on glacier surfaces.

In this case, we simulated the response to an enormous volcanic eruption to test how various processes might affect the climate response.

Taking out ENSO from a climate regression is different from taking out volcanic aerosols, because we don't know if ENSO is itself a forcing, an endogenous response to forcings, a temporally varying exogenous shift in the response of the climate to forcings, or what.

They have risen in response to all El Niño events (over the term of the Reynolds OI.v2 dataset) that weren't counteracted by volcanic eruptions.

* Large volcanic eruptions cause a major dynamical response in the atmosphere * CMIP5 models are assessed for their ability to simulate this response * No models in the CMIP5 database sufficiently represent this response

Despite differences in volcanic aerosol parameters employed, models computing the aerosol radiative effects interactively yield tropical and global mean lower - stratospheric warmings that are fairly consistent with each other and with observations (Ramachandran et al., 2000; Hansen et al., 2002; Yang and Schlesinger, 2002; Stenchikov et al., 2004; Ramaswamy et al., 2006b); however, there is a considerable range in the responses in the polar stratosphere and troposphere.

For example, preservation of interannual variability is critical when assessing the structure and probability of extreme events, including the climate response to volcanic eruptions, a key target in data - model comparisons.

Possible explanations for these results include the neglect of negative forcings in many of the CMIP - 3 simulations of forced climate change), omission of recent temporal changes in solar and volcanic forcing [Wigley, 2010; Kaufmann et al., 2011; Vernier et al., 2011; Solomon et al., 2011], forcing discontinuities at the «splice points» between CMIP - 3 simulations of 20th and 21st century climate change [Arblaster et al., 2011], model response errors, residual observational errors [Mears et al., 2011b], and an unusual manifestation of natural internal variability in the observations (see Figure 7A).

Therefore the most prominent pattern in the data appears to be that which is shared by all: an overall warming trend, and warming in response to el Nino, cooling in response to la Nina and volcanic eruptions.

Bourassa, A. E., A. Robock, W. J. Randel, T. Deshler, L. A. Rieger, N. D. Lloyd, E. J. Llewellyn, and D. A. Degenstein, 2013: Response to Comments on «Large volcanic aerosol load in the stratosphere linked to Asian monsoon transport».

There are a lot of questions: what is the climate response to solar activity and no solar activity, changes in TSI, spectral variability, particle events, cosmic - ray variability, volcanic aerosols, the Antarctic ozone hole.

If you look at the average global response to large volcanic eruptions, from Krakatoa to Pinatubo, you would see that the global temperature decreased by only about 0.1 °C while the hypersensitive climate models give 0.3 to 0.5 °C, not seen in reality.

Stenchikov et al. (2006) showed that models have difficulty in capturing the regional response of the climate system (ao) to Volcanic singularities specifically the temperature regime in eurasia in the Giss model, or in retrodiction ie the Krakatoa problem why was it so warm, thus there is no uniqueness theorem for volcanics.

Take a look at Hansen 1993, scaling from radiation changes in last glacial epoch (plain orbital mechanics affecting irradiation), 3 ± 1 °C, Chylek 2007, differences between the Holocene and the last glacial maximum, 1.3 °C to 2.3 °C, and Bender et al 2010, looking at the response from Mount Pinatubo and the volcanic aerosols, with current temperature ranges, 1.7 to 4.1 °C.