Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników

Znaleziono wyników: 6

Liczba wyników na stronie
Pierwsza strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wstecz Poprzednia strona wyników Strona / 1 Następna strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wprzód Ostatnia strona wyników

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Wyszukiwano:
w słowach kluczowych:  climate model
help Sortuj według:

help Ogranicz wyniki do:
Pierwsza strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wstecz Poprzednia strona wyników Strona / 1 Następna strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wprzód Ostatnia strona wyników
Results from a series of five surveys among five groups of international climate scientists about their evaluation of elements of climate models and of climate change are presented. The first survey was done in 1996, the latest in 2015/16. Thus, our snapshots of the opinions of climate scientists cover 20 years. The results describe a strong increase in agreement concerning issues of manifestation of climate change, i.e., that the warming is real and not influenced by changing measuring and reporting practices, and concerning attribution of this ongoing climate change to ongoing anthropogenic causes. On the other hand, the evaluation of the climate models has changed little in the past 20 years. There are still significant reservations with the models ability to incorporate clouds and to describe rainfall. Obviously the growing conviction of ongoing man-made climate change is based on a variety of explanations, with modelling not being the predominant line of evidence. We suggest that it may be the repeated assessments by the IPCC, based on paleoclimatic evidence and stringent statistical analysis of the instrumental record which have led to the growing consensus of the warming and its causation. We stress that the presented results concern the opinion of climate scientists with a rather broad background. Our results do not assess if the opinions of the surveyed scientists are “valid” or “right”, but they recognize the character of science being a social process.
Climate model results for the Baltic Sea region from an ensemble of eight simulations using the Rossby Centre Atmosphere model version 3 (RCA3) driven with lateral boundary data from global climate models (GCMs) are compared with results from a downscaled ERA40 simulation and gridded observations from 1980 –2006. The results showed that data from RCA3 scenario simulations should not be used as forcing for Baltic Sea models in climate change impact studies because biases of the control climate significantly affect the simulated changes of future projections. For instance, biases of the sea ice cover in RCA3 in the present climate affect the sensitivity of the model’s response to changing climate due to the ice-albedo feedback. From the large ensemble of available RCA3 scenario simulations two GCMs with good performance in downscaling experiments during the control period 1980–2006 were selected. In this study, only the quality of atmospheric surface fields over the Baltic Sea was chosen as a selection criterion. For the greenhouse gas emission scenario A1B two transient simulations for 1961 –2100 driven by these two GCMs were performed using the regional, fully coupled atmosphere-ice-ocean model RCAO. It was shown that RCAO has the potential to improve the results in downscaling experiments driven by GCMs considerably, because sea surface temperatures and sea ice concentrations are calculated more realistically with RCAO than when RCA3 has been forced with surface boundary data from GCMs. For instance, the seasonal 2 m air temperature cycle is closer to observations in RCAO than in RCA3 downscaling simulations. However, the parameterizations of air-sea fluxes in RCAO need to be improved.
Pierwsza strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wstecz Poprzednia strona wyników Strona / 1 Następna strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wprzód Ostatnia strona wyników
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.