Feedback
Sea ice, shown here in Nunavut, in northern Canada, reflects more sunshine, while open ocean absorbs more, accelerating melting.
Feedback is a process in which changing one quantity changes a second quantity, and the change in the second quantity in turn changes the first. Positive feedback increases the change in the first quantity while negative feedback reduces it. Feedback is important in the study of global warming because it may amplify or diminish the effect of a particular process.
Sea ice, shown here in Nunavut, in northern Canada, reflects more sunshine, while open ocean absorbs more, accelerating melting.
Feedback is a process in which changing one quantity changes a second quantity, and the change in the second quantity in turn changes the first. Positive feedback increases the change in the first quantity while negative feedback reduces it. Feedback is important in the study of global warming because it may amplify or diminish the effect of a particular process.
The main positive feedback in the climate system is the water vapor feedback. The main negative feedback is radiative cooling through the Stefan–Boltzmann law, which increases as the fourth power of temperature. Positive and negative feedbacks are not imposed as assumptions in the models, but are instead emergent properties that result from the interactions of basic dynamical and thermodynamic processes.
A wide range of potential feedback processes exist, such as Arctic methane release andice-albedo feedback. Consequentially, potential tipping points may exist, which may have the potential to cause abrupt climate change.
For example, the "emission scenarios" used by IPCC in its 2007 report primarily examined greenhouse gas emissions from human sources. In 2011, a joint study by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration calculated the additional greenhouse gas emissions that would emanate from melted and decomposing permafrost, even if policymakers attempt to reduce human emissions from the A1FI scenario to the A1B scenario. The team found that even at the much lower level of human emissions, permafrost thawing and decomposition would still result in 190 Gt C of permafrost carbon being added to the atmosphere on top of the human sources. Importantly, the team made three extremely conservative assumptions: (1) that policymakers will embrace the A1B scenario instead of the A1FI scenario, (2) that all of the carbon would be released as carbon dioxide instead of methane, which is more likely and over a 20 year lifetime has 72x the greenhouse warming power of CO2, and (3) their model did not project additional temperature rise caused by the release of these additional gases. These very conservative permafrost carbon dioxide emissions are equivalent to about 1/2 of all carbon released from fossil fuel burning since the dawn of the Industrial Age, and is enough to raise atmospheric concentrations by an additional 87±29 ppm, beyond human emissions. Once initiated, permafrost carbon forcing (PCF) is irreversible, is strong compared to other global sources and sinks of atmospheric CO2, and due to thermal inertia will continue for many years even if atmospheric warming stops. A great deal of this permafrost carbon is actually being released as methane instead of carbon dioxide. IPCC 2007's temperature projections did not take any of the permafrost carbon emissions into account and therefore underestimate the degree of expected climate change.
Other research published in 2011 found that increased emissions of methane could instigate significant feedbacks that amplify the warming attributable to the methane alone. The researchers found that a 2.5-fold increase in methane emissions would cause indirect effects that increase the warming 250% above that of the methane alone. For a 5.2-fold increase, the indirect effects would be 400% of the warming from the methane alone.
Calculations of global warming prepared in or before 2001 from a range of climate models under the SRES A2 emissions scenario, which assumes no action is taken to reduce emissions and regionally divided economic development.
Projected change in annual mean surface air temperature from the late 20th century to the middle 21st century, based on a mediumemissions scenario (SRES A1B).This scenario assumes that no future policies are adopted to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Image credit: NOAA GFDL.
A climate model is a computerized representation of the five components of the climate system: Atmosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere, land surface, and biosphere. Such models are based on physical principles including fluid dynamics, thermodynamics and radiative transfer. There can be components which represent air movement, temperature, clouds, and other atmospheric properties; ocean temperature, salt content, and circulation; ice cover on land and sea; the transfer of heat and moisture from soil and vegetation to the atmosphere; chemical and biological processes; and others.
Although researchers attempt to include as many processes as possible, simplifications of the actual climate system are inevitable because of the constraints of available computer power and limitations in knowledge of the climate system. Results from models can also vary due to different greenhouse gas inputs and the model's climate sensitivity. For example, the uncertainty in IPCC's 2007 projections is caused by (1) the use of multiple modelswith differing sensitivity to greenhouse gas concentrations, (2) the use of differing estimates of humanities' future greenhouse gas emissions, (3) any additional emissions from climate feedbacks that were not included in the models IPCC used to prepare its report, i.e., greenhouse gas releases from permafrost.
The models do not assume the climate will warm due to increasing levels of greenhouse gases. Instead the models predict how greenhouse gases will interact with radiative transfer and other physical processes. One of the mathematical results of these complex equations is a prediction whether warming or cooling will occur
Recent research has called special attention to the need to refine models with respect to the effect of clouds and the carbon cycle.
Models are also used to help investigate the causes of recent climate change by comparing the observed changes to those that the models project from various natural and human-derived causes. Although these models do not unambiguously attribute the warming that occurred from approximately 1910 to 1945 to either natural variation or human effects, they do indicate that the warming since 1970 is dominated by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.
The physical realism of models is tested by examining their ability to simulate contemporary or past climates.
Climate models produce a good match to observations of global temperature changes over the last century, but do not simulate all aspects of climate. Not all effects of global warming are accurately predicted by the climate models used by the IPCC. Observed Arctic shrinkage has been faster than that predicted. Precipitation increased proportional to atmospheric humidity, and hence significantly faster than global climate models predict.
A wide range of potential feedback processes exist, such as Arctic methane release andice-albedo feedback. Consequentially, potential tipping points may exist, which may have the potential to cause abrupt climate change.
For example, the "emission scenarios" used by IPCC in its 2007 report primarily examined greenhouse gas emissions from human sources. In 2011, a joint study by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration calculated the additional greenhouse gas emissions that would emanate from melted and decomposing permafrost, even if policymakers attempt to reduce human emissions from the A1FI scenario to the A1B scenario. The team found that even at the much lower level of human emissions, permafrost thawing and decomposition would still result in 190 Gt C of permafrost carbon being added to the atmosphere on top of the human sources. Importantly, the team made three extremely conservative assumptions: (1) that policymakers will embrace the A1B scenario instead of the A1FI scenario, (2) that all of the carbon would be released as carbon dioxide instead of methane, which is more likely and over a 20 year lifetime has 72x the greenhouse warming power of CO2, and (3) their model did not project additional temperature rise caused by the release of these additional gases. These very conservative permafrost carbon dioxide emissions are equivalent to about 1/2 of all carbon released from fossil fuel burning since the dawn of the Industrial Age, and is enough to raise atmospheric concentrations by an additional 87±29 ppm, beyond human emissions. Once initiated, permafrost carbon forcing (PCF) is irreversible, is strong compared to other global sources and sinks of atmospheric CO2, and due to thermal inertia will continue for many years even if atmospheric warming stops. A great deal of this permafrost carbon is actually being released as methane instead of carbon dioxide. IPCC 2007's temperature projections did not take any of the permafrost carbon emissions into account and therefore underestimate the degree of expected climate change.
Other research published in 2011 found that increased emissions of methane could instigate significant feedbacks that amplify the warming attributable to the methane alone. The researchers found that a 2.5-fold increase in methane emissions would cause indirect effects that increase the warming 250% above that of the methane alone. For a 5.2-fold increase, the indirect effects would be 400% of the warming from the methane alone.
Climate models
Calculations of global warming prepared in or before 2001 from a range of climate models under the SRES A2 emissions scenario, which assumes no action is taken to reduce emissions and regionally divided economic development.
Projected change in annual mean surface air temperature from the late 20th century to the middle 21st century, based on a mediumemissions scenario (SRES A1B).This scenario assumes that no future policies are adopted to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Image credit: NOAA GFDL.
A climate model is a computerized representation of the five components of the climate system: Atmosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere, land surface, and biosphere. Such models are based on physical principles including fluid dynamics, thermodynamics and radiative transfer. There can be components which represent air movement, temperature, clouds, and other atmospheric properties; ocean temperature, salt content, and circulation; ice cover on land and sea; the transfer of heat and moisture from soil and vegetation to the atmosphere; chemical and biological processes; and others.
Although researchers attempt to include as many processes as possible, simplifications of the actual climate system are inevitable because of the constraints of available computer power and limitations in knowledge of the climate system. Results from models can also vary due to different greenhouse gas inputs and the model's climate sensitivity. For example, the uncertainty in IPCC's 2007 projections is caused by (1) the use of multiple modelswith differing sensitivity to greenhouse gas concentrations, (2) the use of differing estimates of humanities' future greenhouse gas emissions, (3) any additional emissions from climate feedbacks that were not included in the models IPCC used to prepare its report, i.e., greenhouse gas releases from permafrost.
The models do not assume the climate will warm due to increasing levels of greenhouse gases. Instead the models predict how greenhouse gases will interact with radiative transfer and other physical processes. One of the mathematical results of these complex equations is a prediction whether warming or cooling will occur
Recent research has called special attention to the need to refine models with respect to the effect of clouds and the carbon cycle.
Models are also used to help investigate the causes of recent climate change by comparing the observed changes to those that the models project from various natural and human-derived causes. Although these models do not unambiguously attribute the warming that occurred from approximately 1910 to 1945 to either natural variation or human effects, they do indicate that the warming since 1970 is dominated by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.
The physical realism of models is tested by examining their ability to simulate contemporary or past climates.
Climate models produce a good match to observations of global temperature changes over the last century, but do not simulate all aspects of climate. Not all effects of global warming are accurately predicted by the climate models used by the IPCC. Observed Arctic shrinkage has been faster than that predicted. Precipitation increased proportional to atmospheric humidity, and hence significantly faster than global climate models predict.
No comments:
Post a Comment