On Feb 25, 10:06 pm, Robert I Ellison <[email protected]>
wrote:
> This article on climate computing was published recently.  Only fair
> that I link to it here as well.
>
> http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2010/02/ellison
>
> Climate sensitivity is always a fiction.  There are non-linear
> processes sorted out in computer programs.  So the idea of climate
> sensitivity as a number is related to a doubling of CO2.  It is not
> the same number at 0.5 or 1.5 times CO2 because of the non-linear
> responses.
>
> More generally climate sensitivity is thought of in qualitative terms
> - higher or lower sensitivity to greenhouse gas changes.  In terms of
> abrupt climate change - I think both are answers to the wrong
> question.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/the-co2-problem-in-6-easy-steps/
[...]

Step 5: Climate sensitivity is around 3ºC for a doubling of CO2

The climate sensitivity classically defined is the response of global
mean temperature to a forcing once all the ‘fast feedbacks’ have
occurred (atmospheric temperatures, clouds, water vapour, winds, snow,
sea ice etc.), but before any of the ’slow’ feedbacks have kicked in
(ice sheets, vegetation, carbon cycle etc.). Given that it doesn’t
matter much which forcing is changing, sensitivity can be assessed
from any particular period in the past where the changes in forcing
are known and the corresponding equilibrium temperature change can be
estimated. As we have discussed previously (www.realclimate.org/
index.php/archives/2004/12/index/#ClimateSensitivity ), the last
glacial period is a good example of a large forcing (~7 W/m2 from ice
sheets, greenhouse gases, dust and vegetation) giving a large
temperature response (~5 ºC) and implying a sensitivity of about 3ºC
(with substantial error bars). More formally, you can combine this
estimate with others taken from the 20th century, the response to
volcanoes, the last millennium, remote sensing etc. to get pretty good
constraints on what the number should be. This was done by Annan and
Hargreaves (2006), (www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/03/
climate-sensitivity-plus-a-change/ ) and they come up with, you
guessed it, 3ºC.

-- 
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

Reply via email to