Sentences with phrase «warmer oceans give»

This warming then caused the planet to release more greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide and methane, into the atmosphere, possibly because warmer oceans give off extra gases.

We know that warmer oceans give more energy to hurricanes such as Harvey, causing them to be more severe.

Not exact matches

Scientists define them as periods when the sea surface in a given area of the ocean gets unusually warm for at least five days in a row.

Velicogna and her colleagues also measured a dramatic loss of Greenland ice, as much as 38 cubic miles per year between 2002 and 2005 — even more troubling, given that an influx of fresh melt water into the salty North Atlantic could in theory shut off the system of ocean currents that keep Europe relatively warm.

Given the vastness of the oceans, it may be hard to imagine that warming seas and melting glaciers could raise sea levels enough to inundate thousands of miles of coastline.

The warm waters give up their heat in the bitterly cold regions monitored by OSNAP, become denser, and sink, forming ocean - bottom currents that return southward, hugging the perimeter of the ocean basins.

Lead author, Dr Michael Singer from School of Earth and Ocean Sciences at Cardiff University, said: «In drylands, convective (or short, intense) rainfall controls water supply, flood risk and soil moisture but we have had little information on how atmospheric warming will affect the characteristics of such rainstorms, given the limited moisture in these areas.»

Understanding how carbon flows between land, air and water is key to predicting how much greenhouse gas emissions the earth, atmosphere and ocean can tolerate over a given time period to keep global warming and climate change at thresholds considered tolerable.

«This kind of study discusses the natural cycle and could help define the likely positive feedbacks we can expect in the long - term future, [for example] as temperatures warm, the ocean will want to give up more CO2, or rather absorb less,» says climatologist Gavin Schmidt of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies.

Given the strength of the Hurst coefficients — something we all agree on — is it not possible that a large portion of the current warming trend is a product of internal climate variability, as mediated by complex dynamics of ocean circulation?

``... We present a new analysis of millions of ocean temperature profiles designed to filter out local dynamical changes to give a more consistent view of the underlying warming.

Not surprisingly, given that the surface ocean is responsible for much of atmospheric warming, ocean warming and global surface air temperatures vary largely in phase with one another.

Due to a combination of the warm phase of the solar cycle and an overdue switch to El Niño - when the ocean gives up a lot of heat to the atmosphere, near - future warming is expected.

The top of the curves are warmer years caused by El Niño; a weather phenomenon where the Pacific Ocean gives out heat thus warming the Earth.

This type of warming can not be produced by the ocean circulation, which to a first approximation just moves heat around on the planet — what it robs from Peter it gives to Paul.

Given the atmospheric lifetime of carbon dioxide is many hundreds to thousands of years, we can now understand that long - lived greenhouses will also continue to exert a warming influence on the worlds oceans for a very long time.

At the same time, increasing depth and duration of drought, along with warmer temperatures enabling the spread of pine beetles has increased the flammability of this forest region — http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v1/n9/full/nclimate1293.html http://www.vancouversun.com/fires+through+tinder+pine+beetle+killed+forests/10047293/story.html Can climate models give different TCR and ECS with different timing / extent of when or how much boreal forest burns, and how the soot generated alters the date of an ice free Arctic Ocean or the rate of Greenland ice melt and its influence on long term dynamics of the AMOC transport of heat?

The findings give scientists a better handle on the earth's carbon budget — how much carbon remains in the atmosphere as CO2, contributing to global warming, and how much gets stored in the land or ocean in other carbon - containing forms.

As the warm water reaches high North Atlantic latitudes, it gives up heat and moisture to the atmosphere, leaving cold, salty, dense water that sinks to the ocean floor.

Record and near - record warm ocean waters gave Florida even more of a heat boost, he said.

He shows how warming ocean waters gave Hurricane Katrina the added strength to...

He shows how warming ocean waters gave Hurricane Katrina the added strength to blow right through Florida and on to New Orleans, and he documents worst - case scenarios for accelerated change.

Give your vacation memories a backdrop of palm - fringed sandy beach and warm ocean breezes at Hale Nani Ikena Kai.

Many of these large mammals migrate back to the warm Pacific Ocean waters of Banderas Bay for the winter months to feed, mate or give birth and include, among others:

The warm environmental situation with breathtaking ocean view will give you a new experience.

Regardless, I would posit the worsening winter ice formation is as expected given the poles suffer first and winters warm faster than summers, BUT that this is happening within two years of the EN peak, which was my time line in 2015, one wonders if the combination of warm EN - heated Pacific waters (oceans move slowly) and warm air are a trailing edge of the EN effect OR this is signallibg a phase change driven by that EN, or is just an extreme winter event.

[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?)

Given how much yelling takes place on the Internet, talk radio, and elsewhere over short - term cool and hot spells in relation to global warming, I wanted to find out whether anyone had generated a decent decades - long graph of global temperature trends accounting for, and erasing, the short - term up - and - down flickers from the cyclical shift in the tropical Pacific Ocean known as the El Niño — Southern Oscillation, or ENSO, cycle.

If we knew ocean heat uptake as well as we know atmospheric temperature change, then we could pin down fairly well the radiative imbalance at the top of the atmosphere, which would give us a fair indication of how much warming is «in the pipeline» given current greenhouse gas concentrations.

Given the number of ways that things can go wrong with continued CO2 emissions (from ocean acidfication and sea level rise to simple warming, shifting precipitation patterns, release of buried carbon in perma - frost, and the possibility of higher climate sensitivities — which seem to be needed to account for glacial / inter-glacial transitions), crossing our fingers and carrying on with BAU seems nothing short of crazy to me.

Given that the cryosphere and oceans are far better long - term indicators of changes in Earth's energy balance than the much more «noisy» troposphere, for anyone to suggest that the warming of the Earth system has slowed or stopped over the past 10 years, means they are purposely ignoring the far bigger heat sinks of the cryrosphere and oceans, or they simply want to spout nonsense.

Warming is observed in ocean basins; the match with computer models gives a clear signature of greenhouse - effect wWarming is observed in ocean basins; the match with computer models gives a clear signature of greenhouse - effect warmingwarming.

Given the total energy content of the oceans, the result could only ever be minimal overall warming of that part of the ocean that exchanges energy with the troposphere.

And given the fact that land warms more quickly than ocean, resulting in areas of low pressure over land, changing patterns of atmospheric and oceanic circulation are bringing them to the coasts — where so much life's diversity is found.

Think of what would happen if you could pump cold deep water up to the surface, increasing the air / sea temperature gradient and warming the water; that would give you an anomalously large ocean heat uptake.

The oceans gave up their last big bank of warm water last fall.

When I wrote «In either case, we see no evidence of any long term warming trend, in either the atmosphere or the ocean,» that should have read «long term warming trend due to CO2 emissions...» There may be some evidence consistent with long term warming in the oceans, but I can't see how that could be due to CO2, for reasons given above.

Seems a little astronomical forcing (Milankovitch) led to changes in the ocean and ocean - atmosphere interactions which gave a positive feedback kick to CO2 release which caused a big warm up and rapid glacial melt.

Corresponding time for surface + tropospheric equilibration: given 3 K warming (including feedbacks) per ~ 3.7 W / m2 forcing (this includes the effects of feedbacks): 10 years per heat capacity of ~ 130 m layer of ocean (~ heat capacity of 92 or 93 m of liquid water spread over the whole globe)

Given that the other important variables (sea surface temps, depth of the warm layer, and atmospheric moisture) are all predicted to increase, it seems hard to make the claim that tropical cyclones will be unchanged, just as it seemed unwise to claim that Lyman et al's «Recent cooling of the upper oceans» meant that climate models had fatal flaws.

Given all the independent lines of evidence pointing to average surface warming over the last few decades (satellite measurements, ocean temperatures, sea - level rise, retreating glaciers, phenological changes, shifts in the ranges of temperature - sensitive species), it is highly implausible that it would lead to more than very minor refinements to the current overall picture.

I asked Lee and McPhaden how a connection to greenhouse - driven warming could be made, given the possibility that the Pacific shift could be the result of long - term oscillations in conditions in the ocean unrelated to the buildup of heat - trapping greenhouse gases in the air.

The disequilibrium referred to comes from the fact that the ocean has a lot of thermal inertia and takes a long time to warm up, whereas the atmosphere has a short response time and quickly comes into equilibrium with any given ocean temperature, corresponding to the current amount of greenhouse gases.

The picture I gave neglects the effect of ocean dynamics — cooling by upwelled water entering the mixed layer and warming by imported warm water from the side.

However even the moderate scenarios which have eventual stabilisation give more warming than 0.8 C. Even in the extremely unlikely event that there is no further growth in emissions, the current planetary energy imbalance (estimated to be almost 1W / m2)(due to the ocean thermal inertia) implies that there is around 0.5 C extra warming already in the pipeline that will be realised over the next 20 to 30 years.

(I think that an anomalously warm ocean surface heated from below would lead to more evaporation, and the additional water vapor would give a positive greenhouse effect that would partially offset the effect of a drop in greenhouse gas concentrations.)

And it comes from Emanuel I believe, which is to say the Pacific and Indian Oceans are already warmer, thus this is an opening in the natural system that needs to catch up given the rising global mean temperature.

The authors of the study said the change could be temporary, given the short span of observations, but it matches a slight but steady warming trend in the affected ocean regions and also matches a pattern scientists have predicted would occur under human - caused global warming.

For example: 1) plants giving off net CO2 in hot conditions (r / t aborbing)-- see: http://www.climateark.org/articles/reader.asp?linkid=46488 2) plants dying out due to heat & drought & wild fires enhanced by GW (reducing or cutting short their uptake of CO2 & releasing CO2 in the process) 3) ocean methane clathrates melting, giving off methane 4) permafrost melting & giving off methane & CO2 5) ice & snow melting, uncovering dark surfaces that absorb more heat 6) the warming slowing the thermohaline ocean conveyor & its up - churning of nutrients — reducing marine plant life & that carbon sink.

The implication is that when you dump more GHG in the atmosphere but don't give the ocean time to warm up, then the atmosphere needs to warm up until the sum of the energy lost to space and the energy lost to the ocean surface comes back into balance.