[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We all know Lindzen's line about greenhouse gas forcings already being
> 70% of doubled CO2, and the response that that doesn't mean a 2C
> increase right now, because of aerosols and thermal lag.
>
> What I am wondering about is what would the effect of sudden changes
> in aerosol production from coal fired power plants be?
>
> Would shutting down all coal fired power stations over night yield a
> rapid jump in temperatures, as aerosols are washed out of the
> atmosphere within months?
There would be a rapid increase in forcing, but in broad terms this
would only result in a change in the _rate_ of warming, not a step
change in the temperature itself.
(Local effects could be more rapidly obvious, I expect.)
>
> And,
>
> if you believe Chinese statistics on coal burning, there's been a huge
> jump recently,
>
> mighn't that, the short term at least, actually depress temperatures?
Well it would probably tend to offset the CO2 forcing and perhaps might
be negative overall.
>
> Would anybody here know whether there's a study on the matter/
There have certainly been studies simulating different components of the
forcing, eg omitting all aerosols over the 20th century. The effect is
clearly noticeable but not overwhelming on the global scale.
James
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
