Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
12. Regarding climate sensitivity...
Fri Nov 23, 2012, 10:42 AM
Nov 2012

I've been thinking about the "slow feedback" term that falls out of the paleoclimate work of scientists like Hanson and Kiehle. In their assessment that term raises the climate sensitivity from +3C to +6C. On reflection, I think it probably only acts over geological time scales - too long to matter if the human shit hits the fan in 2050 or so

However, this has me thinking about methane feedbacks. We all seem fairly convinced that methane is going to start belching into the atmosphere any day now, and this process will only speed up as things get warmer.

The +3 curve I have drawn above takes into account only the CO2 released from burning fossil fuels, along with whatever feedbacks that has been generating up to now. For these effects +3C seens like an appropriate sensitivity - unless AR5 has a surprise in stoe for us. In order to account for positive feedbacks we are aware of but are only beginning to enter the picture, I propose to add a second temperature curve that branches off from the +3 curve right about now, and adds an increasing factor to the sensitivity to simulate the addition of methane (and other potential positive feedbacks).

What feels right to me is to gradually increase in the sensitivity from +3 today to +4 over the next 50 years. It won't make a hill of beans difference to what happens between now and 2050, but it will give an indication of what the methane could eventually do to the temperature.

In the process, the current +4.5 curve would disappear.

Any thoughts?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

On the eating of crow... [View all] GliderGuider Nov 2012 OP
The IPCC seems to have hunkered down, ... CRH Nov 2012 #1
I personally think we'll see a shift from the +3 curve to the +4.5 curve GliderGuider Nov 2012 #2
Have a question for you on sensitivity, ... CRH Nov 2012 #3
It's probably a bit of both. GliderGuider Nov 2012 #4
I suspect hunter-gatherers are more resiliant than you give them credit for NickB79 Nov 2012 #11
We may have a social collapse before 2050 NoOneMan Nov 2012 #5
I think it's virtually guaranteed. GliderGuider Nov 2012 #6
I think the decade around 2050 is when the wheels will fall off GliderGuider Nov 2012 #7
Its all about food. Its about how humans get their energy NoOneMan Nov 2012 #8
Spot on GG. n/t. CRH Nov 2012 #10
yeah , that is kinda what we be seein' for a while. ... CRH Nov 2012 #9
Who are "we"? wtmusic Nov 2012 #15
I meant we as in first world nations NoOneMan Nov 2012 #16
Regarding climate sensitivity... GliderGuider Nov 2012 #12
I don't think climate sensitivity is 3.0C. joshcryer Nov 2012 #22
It's time for me to walk back some of my alarmism GliderGuider Nov 2012 #13
There have been "doomers" for millenia NoOneMan Nov 2012 #17
It's a tightrope, all right. GliderGuider Nov 2012 #20
Pfft, I'm the alarmist here, you're the doomer. joshcryer Nov 2012 #23
Hmmm. You have a point there. GliderGuider Nov 2012 #24
Sit back and watch the world burn. joshcryer Nov 2012 #25
Kick to make sure people see my error and apology nt GliderGuider Nov 2012 #14
Emily Litella would be pscot Nov 2012 #18
;-) GliderGuider Nov 2012 #21
I thought that didn't sound right! Odin2005 Nov 2012 #19
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»On the eating of crow...»Reply #12