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)

Lapse rate?[edit]

The current (sole) ref for the lapse rate feedback isn't much use. IPCC says that "The close link between these processes means that water vapour and lapse rate feedbacks are commonly considered together. The strength of the combined feedback is found to be robust across GCMs, despite significant inter-model differences, for example, in the mean climatology of water vapour" [2] William M. Connolley (talk) 08:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

And again: I've removed The effect is reduced by lapse-rate feedback [3] for consideration. This looks to be a paraphrase of The spread among models in the water vapor feedback is, however, largely compensated by an opposite spread in the “lapse-rate feedback,” a negative feedback that occurs because a warmer atmosphere radiates more power to space, thereby reducing net surface warming. As a result, the sum of the two feedbacks is insensitive to errors in predicted warming of the upper troposphere, and at first sight it is wrong: that is saying that in climate models the two feedbacks are generally found to covary in such a way as to cancel errors (or differences). It isn't clear that The effect is reduced by lapse-rate feedback is correct (or even the closer The effect is compensated by lapse-rate feedback. Discuss William M. Connolley (talk) 17:39, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The conclusion is roughly correct but the reasoning is messed up. I've got too much RL stuff to do right now to go into a lot of detail, but basically to the extent that the lapse rate is approximately moist adiabatic, a given increase in surface temperature produces a much larger increase in temperature aloft, thus reducing the lapse rate and increasing radiation lost to space. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 17:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

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)