To repeat:
“This slight hemispheric difference in OLR is half the clear-sky OLR differences and is the principal source of the 0.6 W m-2 global mean imbalance in the TOA net flux”
Comment on The albedo of Earth by Steven Mosher
↧
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by swood1000
Danny Thomas –
This was my impression also which lead to my thinking that the Antarctic ice is a response to this imbalance…
But is there evidence that the imbalance is different from what it was? Also, isn’t there an absence of asymmetry between the Antarctic land ice and sea ice?
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by Steven Mosher
wrong.
as I pointed out above the MET has been experimenting with a 1.4km grid, although they cannot run it as rapidily as they like. at this scale they will be able to improve things like flood warnings. The new system will allow them to run in this mode faster.
The true test of whether it is worthwhile will not come from your comments. it will come from users like Judith and users like me.
right now I am using GFS 10 day forecasts. within a few months I will be able to quantify the benefit of it to the company bottom line. Then of course I will compare it to the products from the MET which are not free.
For my business a forecast doesnt need to be perfect. I need them to predict one and only variable better than a statistical model. if they can do that it could be worth millions in my problem space.
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by curryja
The point that I would like to make here is the linear thinking of separating out individual feedbacks (e.g. cloud, water vapor) doesn’t work very well for a complex nonlinear system (e.g. I focused on a radiation-dynamics-cloud feedback in context of this paper). About 15 years ago I was very gung ho for figuring out a better way to conceptualize/analyze climate feedbacks, but gave up after I truly understood how complex all this is.
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by Steven Mosher
because it is neither straightforward nor perceptive.
almost with exception folks have regarded the paper as interesting and important.
↧
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by KenW
This seems to be exactly the case. In the link I posted down below, they tried balancing the albedo by adding some aerosol to the SH stratosphere – this completely changed the precipitation.
http://judithcurry.com/2015/03/10/the-albedo-of-earth/#comment-682883
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by Steven Mosher
“Up-thread I posed a question about the value of the new Met Office supercomputer in possibly determining things we don’t currently know.”
actually that is not the question you asked.
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by Mi Cro
curryja commented
The point that I would like to make here is the linear thinking of separating out individual feedbacks (e.g. cloud, water vapor) doesn’t work very well for a complex nonlinear system (e.g. I focused on a radiation-dynamics-cloud feedback in context of this paper). About 15 years ago I was very hung ho for figuring out a better way to conceptualize/analyze climate feedbacks, but gave up after I truly understood how complex all this is.
I’m starting to keep coming back to a solar heated distillery. There’s really only one liquid/gas/liquid molecule that’s operating in ours, and the energy in the state change in water far exceeds that of anthro Co2, Co2 forcing is bound by the state changes in water.
Plus, even under clear skies, night time cooling is only limited by Co2 until rel humidity get in the upper 80-90%, and then that water vapor slows cooling. If there’s little to no water it will cool longer and get colder, why deserts get so cold at night, and the tropics get damp at night. Again surface temps are being controlled by the properties of water, Co2 has almost no effect. For instance, night time cooling right after sunset is very high can be 5-10F/hour, when rel humidity is high it’s 1-2F/hour.
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by davideisenstadt
So Mosh…why dont you explain to us all just what question was asked, what question you inferred was being asked, just what question should have been asked, or what question you think should have been asked.
Really Steven, posts that begin with :
“wrong”, or assertions as to what a poster inquired about are pointless.
off your game today, you are.
↧
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by ...and Then There's Physics
Mi Cro,
Again surface temps are being controlled by the properties of water, Co2 has almost no effect.
Sorry, but this is simply wrong. Water vapour is clearly an important greenhouse gas, but it’s not a persistant GHG. CO2 is a persistent GHG. It doesn’t precipitate as easily as water vapour. Without CO2 the water vapour would simply precipitate, the surface would cool, ice sheets would form, and we’d turn into a snowball.
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by davideisenstadt
mosh writes:
“you should get out more. mom’s basement is not the best social scene.”
speak for yourself mosh…
mine comes with uncrustables, because mommy loves me. ;-)
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.2
Danny Thomas, Here is the Brierley Fedorov paper on the relative importance of meridional and zonal sea surface temperature gradients.
There are quite a few papers on how continental drift changed ocean circulation which resulted in a change in climate. They give you an idea of how much impact hemispheric imbalances can have, which gives a rough range of potential natural variability and relevant time frames.
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by Mi Cro
…and Then There’s Physics commented
Again surface temps are being controlled by the properties of water, Co2 has almost no effect.
Sorry, but this is simply wrong. Water vapour is clearly an important greenhouse gas, but it’s not a persistant GHG. CO2 is a persistent GHG. It doesn’t precipitate as easily as water vapour. Without CO2 the water vapour would simply precipitate, the surface would cool, ice sheets would form, and we’d turn into a snowball.
Let’s say in general I agree. But at the current temp range of the planet the atm is full of water and it’s an unlimited supply, so for all of the dry air made near the poles, the tropics are making more wet air. The persistance argument is a red herring for the climate we live in. And as I mentioned
the operating point in this cycle could shift, and in fact the annual temperature rate of change has changed over the last 60 years.
I could agree that some of this could be from Co2.
But I’ve also compared rising and falling temps from 1940 to 2013 for all stations that have at least 360 sample that year in the NCDC GSoD data set, and over all, 65 some million records, night time cooling is a little larger than the previous days warming, it’s close enough that with round they would be 0.0, but there’s slightly more cooling in the surface station data.
There’s no evidence of any loss in cooling in the surface data, temps have gone up, but that doesn’t mean a thing.
↧
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by ...and Then There's Physics
Mi Cro,
But at the current temp range of the planet the atm is full of water and it’s an unlimited supply
I’m not even really sure what you mean by this. The water vapour content of the atmosphere is largely set by the Classius-Clapeyron relation which indicates a dependence on temperature.
The persistance argument is a red herring for the climate we live in.
No, it’s not.
TBH, there’s not much point in us continuing this discussion. I keep getting told that there aren’t really any people who deny anthropogenic global warming, and yet people keep saying things that appear to suggest that they do. I think the discussion would benefit if people challenged such views more than they do (especially on sites such as this) but I’ve done it too often to really have the energy to do so again.
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by tonyb
Mosh
Yes, they are the same questions albeit phrased differently as I tried once again to elicit an answer from someone that was neither baffling, cryptic or obscure to the nth degree
—— ——-
On March 11 12.30 I asked;
‘How does the modelling output of the majority of existing computers compare to the new Met Office one? In other words, are they at all adequate/worthwhile compared to the likely output from the new breed of supercomputers?
If you don’t know, please just say so.’
Then this morning I rephrased and expanded it in the light of the thread subject and its evolution, which was about clouds;
“So, I am afraid I am going to use some question marks here, but the paper raises several questions that need answering, as it seems to me to me that clouds are one of those known unknowns or possibly even an unknown unknown.
Firstly: will the Met Office supercomputer be able to meaningfully interpret the role of clouds within the evolving total weather system, bearing in mind the complex cycles within cycles that also appear to be present?
.
This leads on to a second question which is; Do those existing models from less powerful computers currently simulate the earths climate in a meaningful enough or ‘accurate’ way to be useful to those setting policy?
—— ——–
I was merely asking if existing models from less powerful computers are fit for their intended purpose and will the new met office improve things.
I am not interested in continuing the semantics waltz by rephrasing the question again. If you want to answer, that is great, If you don’t, that is fine. There were already some interesting and understandable ones from other people. There is no hidden trap. No Hidden agenda. No bad faith. No intention to score points. Thank you.
tonyb
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by Joseph
Tony, why don’t you ask your question of global climate modeling experts? I don’t think you are going to find many here
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by David in TX
Whoah… models are tuned?
↧
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by Mi Cro
…and Then There’s Physics commented
I’m not even really sure what you mean by this. The water vapour content of the atmosphere is largely set by the Classius-Clapeyron relation which indicates a dependence on temperature.
This is the proper name for what I was describing, in the tropics, this pumps huge volumes of water into the atm. In it’s current temperature the planet’s distillery is still working, and as long as it continues, the Classius-Clapeyron relation will control surface temps anywhere that isn’t a desert.
The persistance argument is a red herring for the climate we live in.
No, it’s not.
I respectfully disagree.
TBH, there’s not much point in us continuing this discussion. I keep getting told that there aren’t really any people who deny anthropogenic global warming, and yet people keep saying things that appear to suggest that they do.
I don’t deny anthro global warming, I will point out that in the surface data I have it is missing. Am I fully believe that Co2 getting the temp warm enough to start the water cycle is what lead us out of ice ages, but the planet is much much colder.
Also, might I suggest using an IR thermometer and measure the temp of the sky, clear days, cloudy days, warm and cold. Prikia pointed out correctly it doesn’t include the energy from Co2, but it is the Black/Gray body temp from 8-14u for the IR it’s collecting, and it isn’t much. And if you add even the full 4W/m2 of anthro it changes the temp from say -40F to -38F, and yes SB says that will warm the surface some. Maybe march is a little warmer, but I don’t think the max temps are appreciably higher, we’re just doing a better job of measuring temps in more places.
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by curryja
capt, thx for theses refs
↧
Comment on The albedo of Earth by swood1000
If there is stabilizing feedback then apparently it’s providing stability between the NH and the SH. Are we saying that a forcing in one hemisphere (a) will be resisted, through this mechanism, by an absence of forcing in the other, or (b) will be resisted regardless of forcing in the other hemisphere, or (c) will be transmitted, through this mechanism, to the other hemisphere, the stabilizing feedback seen as a kind of conduit through which equilibrium is maintained?
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
