Long-Term Warming Likely to Be Significant Despite Recent Slowdown

Five new NASA Earth science missions are launching in 2014 to expand understanding of Earth’s changing climate and environment.
NASA's "Earth Right Now" website
A new NASA study shows Earth's climate likely will continue to warm during this century on track with previous estimates, despite the recent slowdown in the rate of global warming.
This research hinges on a new and more detailed calculation of the sensitivity of Earth's climate to the factors that cause it to change, such as greenhouse gas emissions. Drew Shindell, a climatologist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, found Earth is likely to experience roughly 20 percent more warming than estimates that were largely based on surface temperature observations during the past 150 years.
Shindell's paper on this research was published March 9 in the journal Nature Climate Change.
Global temperatures have increased at a rate of 0.22 Fahrenheit (0.12 Celsius) per decade since 1951. But since 1998, the rate of warming has been only 0.09 F (0.05 C) per decade -- even as atmospheric carbon dioxide continues to rise at a rate similar to previous decades. Carbon dioxide is the most significant greenhouse gas generated by humans.
Some recent research, aimed at fine-tuning long-term warming projections by taking this slowdown into account, suggested Earth may be less sensitive to greenhouse gas increases than previously thought. The Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which was issued in 2013 and was the consensus report on the state of climate change science, also reduced the lower range of Earth's potential for global warming.
To put a number to climate change, researchers calculate what is called Earth's "transient climate response." This calculation determines how much global temperatures will change as atmospheric carbon dioxide continues to increase – at about 1 percent per year -- until the total amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide has doubled. The estimates for transient climate response range from near 2.52 F (1.4 C) offered by recent research, to the IPCC's estimate of 1.8 F (1.0 C).Cont..

Shindell's study estimates a transient climate response of 3.06 F (1.7 C), and determined it is unlikely values will be below 2.34 F (1.3 C).
Shindell's paper further focuses on improving our understanding of how airborne particles, called aerosols, drive climate change in the Northern Hemisphere. Aerosols are produced by both natural sources – such as volcanoes, wildfire and sea spray – and sources such as manufacturing activities, automobiles and energy production. Depending on their make-up, some aerosols cause warming, while others create a cooling effect. In order to understand the role played by carbon dioxide emissions in global warming, it is necessary to account for the effects of atmospheric aerosols.
While multiple studies have shown the Northern Hemisphere plays a stronger role than the Southern Hemisphere in transient climate change, this had not been included in calculations of the effect of atmospheric aerosols on climate sensitivity. Prior to Shindell's work, such calculations had assumed aerosol impacts were uniform around the globe.
This difference means previous studies have underestimated the cooling effect of aerosols. When corrected, the range of likely warming based on surface temperature observations is in line with earlier estimates, despite the recent slowdown.
One reason for the disproportionate influence of the Northern Hemisphere, particularly as it pertains to the impact of aerosols, is that most man-made aerosols are released from the more industrialized regions north of the equator. Also, the vast majority of Earth's landmasses are in the Northern Hemisphere. This furthers the effect of the Northern Hemisphere because land, snow and ice adjust to atmospheric changes more quickly than the oceans of the world.

579,

All these scientific facts, Emeritus Professors, even invoking NASA. Surely you are not seriously saying these people would know more about climate change than our very own Tony Boloney. Remember, Tony has a firm grip on it, and is not about to let go! Climate change that is, climate change!

Oh for gods sake SteeleRedux, of course the temperature is increasing, we are still coming out of the little ice age.

Just when have you ever heard me, or most skeptics I have ever heard or read say the temperature is not increasing?

What you & your mates would realise, if you ever actually read what was posted, is that we are saying it is now extremely well proven that it is not CO2 causing it. Just as it is not CO2 causing the current drop in world temperature.

It is the con job, that is destroying the west that we argue against.

If you read properly, you would know that I said was temperature has increased just as quickly at least once, & actually a couple of times as it is today. This despite the increase in CO2.

If you lot would just stop wasting billions on wild goose chances after a CO2 cause, we just might have enough money to research the really important mysteries of the weather & climate.

Hasbeen,

You can't have it both ways.

On the one hand you say:

"...of course the temperature is increasing, we are still coming out of the little ice age."

And on the other:

"....Just as it is not CO2 causing the current drop in world temperature."

But there isn't a current "drop" in world temperature.

There's a plateau in surface air temp at "record" levels.

Just like all the other plateaus which preceded previous rises.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics.php?g=47

Hasbeen: "Just thought this should be brought to the attention of those previously taken in by the unprecedented global warming fraud."

What he's talking about is weather. The following, regarding the "unprecedented" rate of temperature increase, is about climate over 11000 years:

http://content.csbs.utah.edu/~mli/Economics%207004/Marcott_Global%20Temperature%20Reconstructed.pdf

There's this on Marcott's analysis:
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/for-the-record/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Perhaps something preceding the last ice age can be found to match the current situation, Hasbeen?
Posted by Luciferase, Thursday, 13 March 2014 1:54:38 AM