Global warming may be far worse than thought, cloud analysis suggests

[Eugene]

Source: The Guardian

Global warming may be far worse than thought, cloud analysis suggests

Researchers find clouds contain more liquid – as opposed to ice –
than was previously believed, threatening greater increase
in temperatures

Oliver Milman
Thursday 7 April 2016 19.00 BST

Climate change projections have vastly underestimated the role that clouds play, meaning future warming could be far worse than is currently projected, according to new research.

Researchers said that a doubling of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere compared with pre-industrial times could result in a global temperature increase of up to 5.3C – far warmer than the 4.6C older models predict.

The analysis of satellite data, led by Yale University, found that clouds have much more liquid in them, rather than ice, than has been assumed until now. Clouds with ice crystals reflect more solar light than those with liquid in them, stopping it reaching and heating the Earth’s surface.

The underestimation of the current level of liquid droplets in clouds means that models showing future warming are misguided, says the paper, published in Science. It also found that fewer clouds will change to a heat-reflecting state in the future – due to CO2 increases – than previously thought, meaning that warming estimates will have to be raised.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/07/clouds-climate-change-analysis-liquid-ice-global-warming

Source: Climate Central

Clouds Play Lesser Role in Curbing Warming, Study Finds

Published: April 7th, 2016

By John Upton

To some, clouds resemble bunnies. To others, they can look like squished flowers. When scientists used NASA data to peer into clouds, what they saw resembled a hazard sign warning of a fast-deteriorating climate ahead.

Analysis of the first seven years of data from a NASA cloud-monitoring mission suggests clouds are doing less to slow the warming of the planet than previously thought, and that temperatures may rise faster than expected as greenhouse gas pollution worsens — perhaps 25 percent faster.

Clouds can play an important role in slowing global warming by reflecting energy back into space. As temperatures rise, clouds contain more liquid water and fewer ice crystals, making them brighter, meaning they reflect more sunlight.

The new research, however, suggests climate models have overestimated how much ice is in clouds, meaning less is available to be converted to liquid as temperatures rise.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: http://www.climatecentral.org/news/clouds-play-lesser-role-in-curbing-warming-20221

[villager]

1. And yet here at "Titanic Underground" the oh-so-important quibbles continue apace...

Why get worried about a bigger picture?

[GliderGuider]

5. Well said. nt

[SoLeftIAmRight]

2. Climate change and the sixth global mass-extinction event is happening now

...

[truebrit71]

16. Yup...

None so blind as those that refuse to see...

[sue4e3]

3. You beat me to it

I literally had this ready to copy and paste. As long as it got done.The only reason I was going to paste it here at all is that I seem to enjoy it so much less then some others. so thank you

[hollysmom]

4. ice is melting faster than predicted storms are getting worse, ......

I am in the middle of the 7 stages of grief over the end of humanity. It is not as if the ones who wanted to change did not get screwed over by those in power who only care about this very minute and have no vision. the celebration of those with no vision has been going on for decades, I guess the space race wore out all the investment in the future. the coming of the Reagan era (error) of party now pay later attitude. The Jack Welch attitude of nothing more than a quarter profit ahead.
I am just stuck on the disbelief of how few care, including y younger relatives. for a country where so few believe in science, they sure are depending on a miracle of science pulling something out of their ass.

[sue4e3]

6. honestly I really hope they do come up with something, I know that the very first thing

we have to hear from "the we're all going to die death cult" is techno fixes are not plausible , or that's to big to do. I was pretty sure the death of humanity was pretty damn big. No I don't suffer from need of a reality check. I think I just want to hope for more than I'm going to get, you know like peace of mind for my children.

[hollysmom]

8. I don't have children, but I have nieces and nephews,

One nephew has been more tuned in than even I, he has been a vegetarian, some times vegan most of his life, and has not had children deliberately even though he does like them because he pretty much thinks it is over. on the other hand I have a pregnant unemployed niece who drives her car to de-stress. One side grow his own food in an organic fashion on his property, doesn't own a car and bikes everywhere (works at home by telecommuting), the other doesn't believe in recycling and eats a lot of very packaged food. very odd world we are living in.

[dixiegrrrrl]

7. Of COURSE it is worse than they thought!

Every discovery, report, study always ends up being worse than they thought.
We are getting a crash course in how unified every single thing on the planet is, after ignoring the idea for so long,
so now the discoveries are showing how much faster we are circling the drain.

[OKIsItJustMe]

10. Well, it depends on who “they” is…

Last edited Mon Apr 11, 2016, 02:38 PM - Edit history (1)

Generally, the IPCC seems to be treated as some radical body, spinning tales of a future world with climates gone crazy.

The truth is that the IPCC, by design, is relatively conservative.

https://ipcc.ch/

[font face=Serif][font size=5]IPCC Factsheet: How does the IPCC review process work?[/font]

[font size=3]…

The first draft of a report is prepared by the authors based on scientific, technical and socio- economic literature in scientific journals and other relevant publications. (See IPCC Factsheet – What literature does the IPCC assess?) This First Order Draft is reviewed by experts. Every interested expert is encouraged to submit comments. Working Groups, members of the author teams, governments, IPCC observer organizations, and other organizations can all encourage experts to register as reviewers, facilitating the participation of experts encompassing as wide a range of views, expertise and geographical representation as possible. For the Fifth Assessment Report, experts could register as reviewers through a process of self-declaration of expertise.

After the expert review of the First Order Draft, author teams prepare a Second Order Draft of the report, taking into account the review comments received; a first draft of the report’s Summary for Policymakers (SPM) is also prepared. These are subject to simultaneous review by experts and governments. Experts who registered for the review of the First Order Draft of the report are automatically registered for this round of review; further experts may register at this stage.

Following receipt of the review comments, author teams then prepare final drafts of the full report and SPM, taking into account review comments received. The final draft of the report is distributed to governments for a final round of written comments on the SPM, before governments meet in plenary session to approve the SPM line by line and accept the underlying report. (See IPCC Factsheet – How does the IPCC approve reports?)

All comments submitted through this review process are addressed by authors, and a written response is provided to each comment on the First Order and Second Order Drafts for later publication.

There are special procedures for the review of the Synthesis Report and its SPM, which undergo one round of simultaneous expert and [font color="Red"]government[/font] review. After revision the Synthesis Report and SPM are sent to [font color="Red"]governments[/font] and IPCC observer organizations for consideration before [font color="Red"]governments meet[/font] in Plenary Session to approve the SPM and adopt the Synthesis Report.

…[/font][/font]

So, first off, it’s a consensus report, however, then, it is reviewed by governments, who soft-pedal the reports.

[dixiegrrrrl]

11. I was thinking of the headlines that say

"Scientists say that........faster than previously thought........."

So whoever "they" are, being quoted.

[OKIsItJustMe]

12. Right!

Typically, that “they” refers to the IPCC.

So, for example, recent reports that sea level may rise much faster than “expected” would be in comparison to IPCC projections. On the other hand, it is no faster than James Hansen predicted a decade ago…

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2005/Keeling_20051206.pdf

[dixiegrrrrl]

14. Thus NO one should really be surprised, we have had warnings for decades. n/t

[OKIsItJustMe]

9. Climate models underestimate global warming by exaggerating cloud 'brightening'

(Please note, US National Research Lab — Copyright concerns are nil.)

https://www.llnl.gov/news/climate-models-underestimate-global-warming-exaggerating-cloud-brightening

[font face=Serif]Apr. 7, 2016

[font size=5]Climate models underestimate global warming by exaggerating cloud 'brightening'[/font]

[font size=3]Researchers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Yale University have found that climate models are aggressively making clouds “brighter” as the planet warms. This may be causing models to underestimate how much global warming will occur due to increasing carbon dioxide. The research appears in the April 8 edition of Science.

As the atmosphere warms, clouds become increasingly composed of liquid rather than ice, making them brighter. Because liquid clouds reflect more sunlight back to space than ice clouds, this “cloud phase feedback” acts as a brake on global warming in climate models.

But most models’ clouds contain too much ice that is susceptible to becoming liquid with warming, which makes their stabilizing cloud phase feedback unrealistically strong. Using a state-of-the-art climate model, the researchers modified parameters to bring the relative amounts of liquid and ice in clouds into agreement with clouds observed in nature. Correcting the bias led to a weaker cloud phase feedback and greater warming in response to carbon dioxide.

“We found that the climate sensitivity increased from 4 degrees C in the default model to 5-5.3 degrees C in versions that were modified to bring liquid and ice amounts into closer agreement with observation,” said Yale researcher Ivy Tan, lead author of the paper.

Climate sensitivity refers to the change in global mean surface temperature due to a doubling of carbon dioxide. Climate models predict between 2.1 and 4.7 degrees C (3.75 to 8.5 degrees F) of warming in response to a doubling of carbon dioxide.

“We saw a systematic weakening of the cloud phase feedback and increase in climate sensitivity as we transitioned from model versions that readily convert liquid to ice below freezing to model versions that can maintain liquid down to colder temperatures, as observed in nature,” Tan explained.

In nature, clouds containing both ice crystals and liquid droplets are common at temperatures well below freezing. As the atmosphere warms due to carbon dioxide emissions, the relative amount of liquid in these so-called mixed phase clouds will increase. Since liquid clouds tend to reflect more sunlight back to space than ice clouds, this phase feedback acts to reduce global warming. The icier the clouds to begin with, the more liquid is gained as the planet warms; this stabilizing feedback is stronger in models containing less liquid relative to ice at sub-freezing temperatures.

“Most climate models are a little too eager to glaciate below freezing, so they are likely exaggerating the increase in cloud reflectivity as the atmosphere warms,” said LLNL coauthor Mark Zelinka. “This means they may be systematically underestimating how much warming will occur in response to carbon dioxide.”

These results add to a growing body of evidence that the stabilizing cloud feedback at mid- to high latitudes in climate models is overstated. Moreover, several recent studies have concluded that other important cloud feedback also are likely to exacerbate warming rather than dampen it. These include amplifying feedback from increases in cloud top altitude and from decreases in the coverage of subtropical low clouds.

“The evidence is piling up against an overall stabilizing cloud feedback,” concluded Zelinka. “Clouds do not seem to want to do us any favors when it comes to limiting global warming.”

This work was funded by the NASA Earth and Space Science Fellowship Program and the Regional and Global Climate Modeling Program in the Department of Energy’s Office of Science.
[/font][/font]

[NickB79]

13. Almost a full degree C above previous estimates. Guess that 2C limit is fucked, huh?

So much for the Paris Convention saving our collective asses from the fire we've started.

[GliderGuider]

15. If there was one thing from Paris that discredited the entire COP process

It was all the solemn affirmations about 1.5C...