Is climate sensitivity high or low?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: BERING IN MIND: A bushel of facts about the uniqueness of humanpubic hair
Next: ARCTIC OCEAN WARMING, ICEBERGS GROWING SCARCE, WASHINGTON POST REPORTS [33 scary quotes since 1870]
From: Meteorologist on 3 Mar 2010 11:49 Potential Biases in Feedback Diagnosis from Observational Data: A Simple Model Demonstration ROY W. SPENCER AND WILLIAM D. BRASWELL http://www.drroyspencer.com/Spencer-and-Braswell-08.pdf ----- The Economics and Policy of Global Warming G. Cornelis van Kooten, E. Calvin Beisner and Pete Geddes http://web.uvic.ca/~repa/workingpapers/WorkingPaper2009-07.pdf "In the natural system, then, feedbacks eliminateabout 58% of GHG warmingthat is, feedbacks are strongly net negative. But to get climate sensitivity above 1.2° C one must assume that positive feedbacks are strongly net positiveprecisely the opposite of what is found in nature. Research published since the May 2005 cutoff date for consideration in the IPCC 2007 Scientific Assessment Report (Schwartz 2007, Spencer et al. 2007, Spencer and Braswell 2008, Spencer 2008, and Lindzen and Choi 2009) confirms that the feedbacks are net negative, with climate sensitivity probably around 0.5° C instead of the IPCCs midrange of 3.0° C. This virtually eliminates the possibility of 10° to 20° C warming from doubled CO2." ----- Climate Sensitivity Estimates: Heading Down, Way Down? (Richard Lindzens New Paper) Chip Knappenberger http://74.125.155.132/scholar?q=cache:VTykFkvmZMoJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=40000000&as_ylo=2007 "MIT climate scientists Richard Lindzen and collaborator Yong-Sang Choi soon-to-be published paper (Geophysical Research Letters, American Geophysical Union) pegs the earths climate sensitivitythe degree the earths temperature responds to various forces of changeat a value that is about six times less than the best estimate put forth by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The smaller the climate sensitivity, the less the impact that rising carbon dioxide levels will have on the earths climate. The less the impact that CO2 emissions will have on the earths climate, the less the problem and ability to reverse the problem. Lindzen and Chois findings should come as a solace to those folks who are alarmed about future climate and as a bulwark to those folks fighting to limit Congresses negative impact on U.S. energy supplies and our economy. Indeed, climate sensitivity to GHGs is the multi- billion dollar question in climate science. If climate sensitivity is low, then the earths temperature doesnt react very much to variations in processes which impact itsuch things as solar variations, volcanic eruptions, cloudcover fluctuations or changes in the concentration of greenhouse gases." ----- Who is Chip Knappenberger? http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chip_Knappenberger ----- On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data Richard S. Lindzen and Yong-Sang Choi http://www.drroyspencer.com/Lindzen-and-Choi-GRL-2009.pdf ----- Discussion of Lindzen/Choi paper http://www2b.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/newposts/4294/topic4294347.shtm ----- http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/browse_thread/thread/bb31e7502496b2b9/a387f225fdcd1b7c?hl=en&q=%22On+the+determination+of+climate+feedbacks+from+ERBE+data%22 Extract - A paper by Richard Lindzen and Yong-Sang Choi, called "On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data", published in July 2009 in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, examined the modellers' case for CO2-induced global warming. It offered 12 graphs, 11 of them based on the most sophisticated climate models, all but one of which showed that as the temperature of the surface of the seas increases slightly, the amount of heat then trapped in the atmosphere by water vapour increases - a key element in accelerating the "greenhouse effect". We should be worried. Yet there was that odd graph out, the 12th one. As Lubo? Motl, a sceptical physicist, joked, could it be that this was a tainted model - with its assumptions "tweaked" to fit prejudices by climate-change "deniers" funded by the oil industry? But no - the graph that contradicted all the others was the one based not on a model but on satellite measurements. It showed the Earth's oceans dampening the heating effect. ---------- David Christainsen |