This article in Nature Geoscience http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/ngeo1836.pdf
is getting a lot of attention for suggesting that TCR is 1.3(C) i.e. at lower end of previous IPCC estimates. It is getting attention from "lukewarmists" (see eg http://judithcurry.com/2013/05/19/mainstreaming-ecs-2-c/). Personally, I don't see how it changes the big picture much, since whether TCR is 1, 2, 3 or 4, as long as CO2 keeps going up, eventually we will get to an intolerable state. But slower warming is an argument for slower GE. Fred Energy budget constraints on climate response - Alexander Otto<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-1>, - Friederike E. L. Otto<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-2>, - Olivier Boucher<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-3>, - John Church<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-4>, - Gabi Hegerl<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-5>, - Piers M. Forster<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-6>, - Nathan P. Gillett<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-7>, - Jonathan Gregory<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-8>, - Gregory C. Johnson<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-9>, - Reto Knutti<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-10>, - Nicholas Lewis<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-11>, - Ulrike Lohmann<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-12>, - Jochem Marotzke<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-13> , - Gunnar Myhre<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-14>, - Drew Shindell<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-15>, - Bjorn Stevens<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-16> - &Myles R. Allen<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#auth-17> - Affiliations<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#affil-auth> - Contributions<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#contrib-auth> - Corresponding author<http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1836.html#corres-auth> Nature Geoscience (2013) doi:10.1038/ngeo1836Published online 19 May 2013 The paper looks at climate sensitivity - both ECS (long term) TCS (short term). It concludes that ECS is somewhat lower, but within the nominal IPCC range. The analysis of TCS is more significant, suggesting that short term climate may have warmed 20% less than expected using the AR4 position, with attribution mostly to the oceans warming up a bot faster. This is the "warming has slowed" argument. --- Fred Zimmerman Geoengineering IT! Bringing together the worlds of geoengineering and information technology GE NewsFilter: http://geoengineeringIT.net:8080 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
