<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[Azimuth]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[John Baez]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/author/johncarlosbaez/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[New Climate Sensitivity&nbsp;Estimate]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>Devoted readers will remember my interview of Nathan Urban in <a href="http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week302.html">week302</a>&#8212;<a href="http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week305.html">week305</a> of This Week&#8217;s Finds.  We talked about how he estimated the probability that global warming will cause the biggest current in the North Atlantic to collapse.</p>
<p>Now he and a bunch of coauthors have a new paper using paleoclimate data and some of the same mathematical techniques to estimate of how much the Earth will warm if we double the amount of CO<sub>2</sub> in the atmosphere:</p>
<p>&bull; A. Schmittner, N.M. Urban, J.D. Shakun, N.D. Mahowald, P.U. Clark, P.J. Bartlein, A.C. Mix and A. Rosell-Melé, <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/~nurban/pubs/lgm-cs-uvic.pdf">Climate sensitivity estimated from temperature  reconstructions of the last glacial maximum</a>, <i><a href="http://newscience.planet3.org/2011/11/24/interview-with-nathan-urban-on-his-new-paper-climate-sensitivity-estimated-from-temperature-reconstructions-of-the-last-glacial-maximum/">Science</a></i>, 2011.</p>
<p>The average global temperature rise when we double the amount of CO<sub>2</sub> in the atmosphere is called the <b>climate sensitivity</b>.</p>
<p>The paper claims that the “likely” (66% probability) climate sensitivity is between 1.7 and 2.6 °C.  They say it&#8217;s &#8220;very likely&#8221; (90% probability) that the climate sensitivity is between 1.4 and 2.8 °C.   Their best estimate is around 2.2 or 2.3 °C.  </p>
<p>If true, this is good news, because other studies suggest 3 °C as the best estimate, 2 to 4.5 °C as the &#8220;very likely&#8221; range, and a chance of even higher figures.</p>
<p>On the other hand, Nathan and his collaborators predict a significantly higher climate sensitivity <i>on land</i>.  Here&#8217;s a graph of the probability density for various possible values</p>
<div align="center">
<a href="http://www.princeton.edu/~nurban/pubs/lgm-cs-uvic.pdf"><br />
<img src="https://i2.wp.com/math.ucr.edu/home/baez/nathan_urban_climate_sensitivity.jpg" /></a></div>
<p>As you can see, their analysis easily allows for warming of 3 to 4 °C <i>on land</i> if we double the amount of CO<sub>2</sub>.</p>
<p>The best summary of the paper is this new interview of Nathan Urban by the blogger &#8216;thingsbreak&#8217;:</p>
<p>&bull; Thingsbreak, <a href="http://newscience.planet3.org/2011/11/24/interview-with-nathan-urban-on-his-new-paper-climate-sensitivity-estimated-from-temperature-reconstructions-of-the-last-glacial-maximum/">Interview with Nathan Urban on his new paper “Climate sensitivity estimated from temperature reconstructions of the last glacial maximum”</a>, <i>Planet 3.0</i>, 24 November 2010.</p>
<p>So, check that out if you want more details but aren&#8217;t quite ready for the actual paper!  There&#8217;s a lot of important stuff I haven&#8217;t said here.</p>
]]></html><thumbnail_url><![CDATA[https://i2.wp.com/math.ucr.edu/home/baez/nathan_urban_climate_sensitivity.jpg?fit=440%2C330]]></thumbnail_url><thumbnail_height><![CDATA[203]]></thumbnail_height><thumbnail_width><![CDATA[415]]></thumbnail_width></oembed>