Dependencia de la humedad de saturación (q*) con la temperatura (T) Pendiente crece con la temperatura.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WGCM CFMIP/IPCC Climate Sensitivity Meeting, Exeter, April 2004 Decadal Variability in Water Vapour Richard Allan, Tony Slingo Environmental Systems Science.
Advertisements

Towards predicting climate system changes and diagnosing feedbacks from observations Gabi Hegerl, GeoSciences, U Edinburgh Thanks to: Reto.
© University of Reading Chapman Conference on Atmospheric Water Vapor and Its Role in Climate Tropospheric Water Vapour and.
IPCC Workshop on Climate Sensitivity, Paris, July 2004 Exploiting observations of water vapour to investigate simulations of water vapour feedback processes.
FEEDBACK PARAMETERS Let T s = global mean surface air temperature R= net flux of heat into the climate system ΔR f = change in R due to some change in.
Water Vapor Feedback [W]ater vapor, confessedly the greatest thermal absorbent in the atmosphere, is dependent on temperature for its amount, and if another.
1 Dynamical Polar Warming Amplification and a New Climate Feedback Analysis Framework Ming Cai Florida State University Tallahassee, FL 32306
Water Vapor and Lapse Rate Feedbacks Neil Gordon ESP Seminar April 14, 2006.
Understanding Feedback Processes Outline Definitions Magnitudes and uncertainties Geographic distributions and priorities Observational requirements.
Cloud Feedback Katinka Nov 7,2011 *Photo taken by Paquita Zuidema in Maldives.
BBOS meeting on Boundary Layers and Turbulence, 7 November 2008 De Roode, S. R. and A. Los, QJRMS, Corresponding paper available from
NORMAL OR GAUSSIAN DISTRIBUTION Chapter 5. General Normal Distribution Two parameter distribution with a pdf given by:
Alan Robock Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey USA
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Review June 30 - July 2, 2009.
Global Warming and Climate Sensitivity Professor Dennis L. Hartmann Department of Atmospheric Sciences University of Washington Seattle, Washington.
Climate Forcing and Physical Climate Responses Theory of Climate Climate Change (continued)
Cloud feedbacks in ECHAM5: preparatory results for CMIP5 Daniel Klocke Johannes Quaas, Marco Giorgetta Max-Planck-Institut für Meteorologie KlimaCampus,
Radiative Properties of Eastern Pacific Stratocumulus Clouds Zack Pecenak Evan Greer Changfu Li.
Toward urgent forecasting of aftershock hazard: Simultaneous estimation of b-value of the Gutenberg-Richter ’ s law of the magnitude frequency and changing.
Impacts of Aerosols on Climate Extremes in the USA Nora Mascioli.
Cambiamento attuale: Biogeochimica CLIMATOLOGIA Prof. Carlo Bisci.
Seasonal Cycle of Climate Feedbacks in the NCAR CCSM3.0 Patrick Taylor CLARREO Science Team Meeting July 7, 2010 Patrick Taylor CLARREO Science Team Meeting.
Trends in Tropical Water Vapor ( ): Satellite and GCM Comparison Satellite Observed ---- Model Simulated __ Held and Soden 2006: Robust Responses.
Trends in Tropical Water Vapor ( ): Satellite and GCM Comparison Satellite Observed ---- Model Simulated __ Held and Soden 2006: Robust Responses.
Radiative Feedback Analysis of CO2 Doubling and LGM Experiments ○ M. Yoshimori, A. Abe-Ouchi CCSR, University of Tokyo and T. Yokohata National Institute.
Figure 1: The model for crosstalk between the Gαi and Gαq pathways depends on both differential specificity and activity for Gαi, Gαq and Gβγ interactions.
HAPPY 25 TH !!!! Cloud Feedback George Tselioudis NASA/GISS.
Climate feedbacks: calculating from models Want to consider effect of variations in: a) water vapor; b) clouds; c) sea-ice; d) snow cover; etc.. For i.
Critical points of the Earth System (Source: H. J. Shellnhuber, IGBP)
Date of download: 7/5/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. A graph of the structure factor at volume fractions fv=0.001, 0.2, and 0.5 as a.
Date of download: 7/10/2016 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved. From: A Model for Highly Strained DNA Compressed Inside a Protein Cavity J. Comput.
From: Accuracy of Wearable Sensors for Estimating Joint Reactions
Ryan Kramer and Brian Soden University of Miami/RSMAS
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
IPCC Working Group I Chapter 9 FINAL FIGURES
Mechanical Stability and Reversible Fracture of Vault Particles
Fiona E. Müllner, Sheyum Syed, Paul R. Selvin, Fred J. Sigworth 
Components of the yield trend.
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
Application of the ensemble technique to CRCM simulations
IPCC Working Group I Chapter 8 FINAL FIGURES
Linking Electrical Stimulation of Human Primary Visual Cortex, Size of Affected Cortical Area, Neuronal Responses, and Subjective Experience  Jonathan.
Coding of the Reach Vector in Parietal Area 5d
Prescribed forcings. Prescribed forcings. (Top) Volcanic forcing is indicated as global visible optical depth. (Middle) Solar forcing is obtained by scaling.
Visual Search and Attention
CO2 forcing induces semi-direct effects
by Michael J. Mina, C. Jessica E. Metcalf, Rik L. de Swart, A. D. M. E
Volume 111, Issue 2, Pages (July 2016)
Fig. 2. Best model fits. Best model fits. Illustration of the best model fits for the (A) basic, (B) continuous, and (C) cluster models. See Table 1 and.
Distributions of ratios of MFI by visit for the stimulated/unstimulated, stimulated/inhibited+stimulated and inhibited+stimulated/unstimulated samples.
FRET or No FRET: A Quantitative Comparison
by W. R. Binns, M. H. Israel, E. R. Christian, A. C. Cummings, G. A
by Gerald T. Rustic, Athanasios Koutavas, Thomas M
by Thomas R. Karl, Anthony Arguez, Boyin Huang, Jay H
Kristen E. Norman, Hugh Nymeyer  Biophysical Journal 
Michael Schlierf, Felix Berkemeier, Matthias Rief  Biophysical Journal 
Noise in hoxb1a/krox20 expression leads to boundary sharpening.
by W. R. Binns, M. H. Israel, E. R. Christian, A. C. Cummings, G. A
Long-Range Nonanomalous Diffusion of Quantum Dot-Labeled Aquaporin-1 Water Channels in the Cell Plasma Membrane  Jonathan M. Crane, A.S. Verkman  Biophysical.
Median and likely range (17th–83rd percentile as used in the AR5) estimates of the ice sheet SLR contributions for different temperature scenarios and.
Dynamics of the Transition between Open and Closed Conformations in a Calmodulin C-Terminal Domain Mutant  Johan Evenäs, Anders Malmendal, Mikael Akke 
Fig. 2 Model-data comparison for latest Paleocene (2240 ppm) and PETM (4480 ppm) CO2 scenarios. Model-data comparison for latest Paleocene (2240 ppm) and.
Vertical ground reaction force–time waveforms for RFS trials.
Vertical ground reaction force–time waveforms for FFS trials.
Steady-State Differential Dose Response in Biological Systems
Yongli Zhang, Junyi Jiao, Aleksander A. Rebane  Biophysical Journal 
Fig. 2 Spatial distribution of earthquake density derived from a catalog spanning 93 nights of the LB Array data set. Spatial distribution of earthquake.
Actin Filament Strain Promotes Severing and Cofilin Dissociation
Dislocation-accommodated grain boundary sliding as the major deformation mechanism of olivine in the Earth’s upper mantle by Tomohiro Ohuchi, Takaaki Kawazoe,
Relationships between species richness and temperature or latitude
Presentation transcript:

Dependencia de la humedad de saturación (q*) con la temperatura (T) Pendiente crece con la temperatura

Dependencia de la adiabática húmeda con temperatura a presión constante

Figure Comparison between different estimates of the PDF (or relative likelihood) for ECS (°C). All PDFs/likelihoods have been scaled to integrate to unity between 0°C and 10°C ECS. The bars show the respective 5 to 95% ranges, dots the median estimate. The PDFs/likelihoods based on instrumental data are from Andronova and Schlesinger (2001), Forest et al. (2002; dashed line, considering anthropogenic forcings only), Forest et al. (2006; solid, anthropogenic and natural forcings), Gregory et al. (2002a), Knutti et al. (2002), Frame et al. (2005), and Forster and Gregory (2006), transformed to a uniform prior distribution in ECS using the method after Frame et al. (2005). Hegerl et al. (2006a) is based on multiple palaeoclimatic reconstructions of NH mean temperatures over the last 700 years. Also shown are the 5 to 95% approximate ranges for two estimates from the LGM (dashed, Annan et al., 2005; solid, Schneider von Deimling et al., 2006) which are based on models with different structural properties. Note that ranges extending beyond the published range in Annan et al. (2005), and beyond that sampled by the climate model used there, are indicated by dots and an arrow, since Annan et al. only provide an upper limit. For details of the likelihood estimates, see Table 9.3. After Hegerl et al. (2006a). 2xCO2 IPCC-AR4

Figure Comparison of GCM climate feedback parameters for water vapour (WV), cloud (C), surface albedo (A), lapse rate (LR) and the combined water vapour plus lapse rate (WV + LR) in units of W m –2 C –1. ALL represents the sum of all feedbacks. Results are taken from Colman (2003a; blue, black), Soden and Held (2006; red) and Winton (2006a; green). Closed blue and open black symbols from Colman (2003a) represent calculations determined using the partial radiative perturbation (PRP) and the radiative-convective method (RCM) approaches respectively. Crosses represent the water vapour feedback computed for each model from Soden and Held (2006) assuming no change in relative humidity. Vertical bars depict the estimated uncertainty in the calculation of the feedbacks from Soden and Held (2006). IPCC-AR4