Talk:Climate change feedback

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Meteorology (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Meteorology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Meteorology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Environment / Climate change  (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Climate change task force.
 
WikiProject Geology (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Climate change feedback is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Arctic (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arctic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arctic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Cleanup and references[edit]

Cleaned up some refs and code, switched some to LDR, others to {{Cite doi}}. We're using the latest AFAIK. Some references I think could be improved. For example, #2 from the University of Texas are lecture notes, and #4 is about planetary science in general—not really focused on climate change feedback.[1] ChyranandChloe (talk)

Atmoz edits cleaned up the problem[edit]

it may be the kiss of death, but I support his corrections. --Africangenesis (talk) 22:35, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Wording needs tweaking[edit]

The statement in the ice-albedo feedback section :

The Antarctic sea ice reached its greatest extent on record since the beginning of observation in 1979,[56] but the gain in ice in the south is exceeded by the loss in the north. The trend for global sea ice, northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere combined is clearly a decline.[57]

could use some attention. While is may have been correct at the time it was added, to state that the net anomaly was negative, it is positive at the moment. Note that footnote 57 is a link to an updated graph, so current results can be seen. It appears to be the case that it has been negative more often than positive in this century, but given the current positive value, the sentence needs amending. It is also likely true that the trend line has a negative slope, but as there is no trendline, and the last few months show a value above the 1979–2008 mean, it is hardly "clear" that there is a decline. More nuanced wording, ideally supported by an actual calculation of a trendline supported by an RS would help.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:49, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Cloud feedback[edit]

Why is cloud feedback only under the positive feedbacks? Just about any paper states that it can be both. That the IPCC states that it is "more likely a positive than a negative feedback" doesn't change that. SymbolicFrank (talk) 02:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Oceans feedback[edit]

The oceans first and foremost provide a negative feedback by absorbing and sequestering carbon. While this ability may be attenuated with warmer oceans, it doesn't flip it into a 'positive feedback' I find it deceptive to list Oceans under POSITIVE. Toddie 18:39, 24 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toddrav (talkcontribs)

Todd, you are required to WP:Assume good faith, or your contributions aren't really helpful or desired. Application of AGF would conclude simply that someone made a mistake. I agree that "Carbon uptake by oceans" does not belong under the "Positive" list; for that matter, the topic of ocean uptake is already described in the "negative feedbacks" section.
I have removed the text formerly under "positive" and am posting here. Maybe there is useful links, refs, etc that should be merged into the existing subsection under negative feedbacks - carbon cycle. The removed text was
==== CO<sub>2</sub> uptake by oceans ====
{{main|Airborne fraction}}
{{Further|Effects of global warming#Oceans}}
Cooler water can absorb more CO<sub>2</sub> than warmer water. As ocean temperatures rise the oceans will absorb less CO<sub>2</sub> resulting in more warming. Conversely when cooler the oceans have absorbed more CO<sub>2</sub>, resulting in further cooling. There is about 50 times more carbon in the oceans than there is in the atmosphere.<ref>Netting, Ruth, [http://science.nasa.gov/earth-science/oceanography/ocean-earth-system/ocean-carbon-cycle/ "Carbon Cycle - NASA Science"], ''NASA'', Last Updated: April 5, 2010, Accessed 4/22/2010</ref>
In addition to the water itself, the ecosystems of the oceans also sequester carbon. Their ability to do so is also expected to decline as the oceans warm: Warming reduces the nutrient levels of the [[mesopelagic zone]] (about 200 to 1000 m deep), which limits the growth of [[diatom]]s in favor of smaller [[phytoplankton]] that are poorer [[biological pump]]s of carbon.<ref>{{Cite doi|10.1126/science.1137959}}</ref>
NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:54, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
The thing is, the Ocean first acts as a negative feedback on increased CO2 levels, but at one point is projected to sequester less. This study on feedbacks describes processes related to feedbacks and ocean. The ocean is part of the carbon cycle, and this should be mentioned. I think rather than to remove the content, adjustments should be made.
Another example
For instance, higher temperatures may lead to increased release of CO2 , methane and N2O 3 from terrestrial ecosystems and to increased oceanic denitrification and stratification, resulting in nutrient limitation of algal growth reducing the CO2 sink to the ocean. Also, CaCO3 neutralization in the ocean is reduced at higher temperatures [Archer et al., 2004]. Several analyses with elaborate coupled climate-carbon models that take such feedbacks into account suggest an overall amplification of the effects of anthropogenic addition of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere [Cox et al., 2000; Friedlingstein et al., 2001; Prentice et al., 2001; Friedlingstein et al., in press]. However, we are still far from able to compute the relative strengths of the multitude of known (and unknown) relevant processes on a global scale with much precision [Prentice et al., 2001; Friedlingstein et al., 2003].
prokaryotes (talk) 23:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Obviously, the article attempts to present a list - that is to say, a big picture list - of various component mechanisms. If we name some major component of the climate system, such as 'oceans', yeah.... we could wander off into a confusing house of mirrors trying to describe the entire system's interactions simultaneously. Better, in my view, to break down the individual pieces - such as carbon uptake - and list those under "positive" or "negative" based on current status. If further climate change is projected to increase/decrease their impact, fine... we can mention that in the text. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:04, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Good, please add something about it. prokaryotes (talk) 23:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
If you had understood what I wrote, you would have known that there were already two subsections addressing oceanic carbon uptake. What, you want me to add a third? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 03:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
The ocean parts need to be extended still. See above quotes. If you do not add it into the article, fine. Someone else will do it then. prokaryotes (talk) 04:51, 26 May 2015 (UTC)