Explained: Climate sensitivity

Mar 19, 2010 by David L. Chandler
Graphic: Christine Daniloff

Climate sensitivity is the term used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to express the relationship between the human-caused emissions that add to the Earth's greenhouse effect -- carbon dioxide and a variety of other greenhouse gases -- and the temperature changes that will result from these emissions.

Specifically, the term is defined as how much the average global surface temperature will increase if there is a doubling of greenhouse gases (expressed as carbon dioxide equivalents) in the air, once the planet has had a chance to settle into a new equilibrium after the increase occurs. In other words, it’s a direct measure of how the Earth’s climate will respond to that doubling.

That value, according to the most recent IPCC report, is 3 degrees Celsius, with a range of uncertainty from 2 to 4.5 degrees.

This sensitivity depends primarily on all the different feedback effects, both positive and negative, that either amplify or diminish the . There are three primary feedback effects — clouds, and ; these, combined with other feedback effects, produce the greatest uncertainties in predicting the planet’s future climate.

With no feedback effects at all, the change would be just 1 degree Celsius, climate scientists agree. Virtually all of the controversies over hinge on just how strong the various feedbacks may be — and on whether scientists may have failed to account for some of them.

Clouds are a good example. Clouds can have either a positive or negative feedback effect, depending on their altitude and the size of their water droplets. Overall, most scientists expect this net effect to be positive, but there are large uncertainties.

“There is still lots of uncertainty in what the climate sensitivity is,” says Andrei Sokolov, a research scientist in MIT’s Center for Global Change Science, who has been doing research on climate sensitivity for many years. “Feedback is what’s driving things,” he says.

It is important to note that climate sensitivity is figured on the basis of an overall doubling, compared to pre-industrial levels, of and other greenhouse gases. But the temperature change given by this definition of climate sensitivity is only part of the story. The actual increase might be greater in the long run because levels in the atmosphere could more than double without strong policies to control emissions. But in the short run, the actual warming could be less than suggested by the climate sensitivity, since due to the thermal inertia of the ocean, it may take some time after a doubling of the concentration is reached before the climate reaches a new equilibrium.

This is the second part of an “Explained” on climate change. Part one dealt with radiative forcing.

Explore further: Clean air: Fewer sources for self-cleaning

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Water vapor confirmed as major player in climate change

Nov 17, 2008

(PhysOrg.com) -- Water vapor is known to be Earth's most abundant greenhouse gas, but the extent of its contribution to global warming has been debated. Using recent NASA satellite data, researchers have estimated ...

Explained: Radiative forcing

Mar 10, 2010

When people talk about global warming or the greenhouse effect, the main underlying scientific concept that describes the process is radiative forcing. And despite all the recent controversy over leaked emails ...

Recommended for you

Six Nepalese dead, six missing in Everest avalanche

5 hours ago

At least six Nepalese climbing guides have been killed and six others are missing after an avalanche struck Mount Everest early Friday in one of the deadliest accidents on the world's highest peak, officials ...

User comments : 4

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1.9 / 5 (9) Mar 19, 2010
...There is still lots of uncertainty in what the climate sensitivity is...

So the Science isn't settled!

2.6 / 5 (5) Mar 19, 2010
The theory of gravity isn't certain, so lets all fly!!!!

2.1 / 5 (7) Mar 19, 2010
Come on already. The IPCC has been discredited.....

I personally dont believe anything they say anymore. They are not a true scientific panel.
2.3 / 5 (3) Mar 23, 2010
nope, you'd like to think the IPCC has been discredited to fit your political agenda and / or viewpoint.

Only in america's great fixed news machine does this "IPCC controversy" even really exist. But whatever, its part of the anti-elitist / scientist / "people who actually think" mentality.


More news stories

New research on Earth's carbon budget

(Phys.org) —Results from a research project involving scientists from the Desert Research Institute have generated new findings surrounding some of the unknowns of changes in climate and the degree to which ...

Researchers uncover likely creator of Bitcoin

The primary author of the celebrated Bitcoin paper, and therefore probable creator of Bitcoin, is most likely Nick Szabo, a blogger and former George Washington University law professor, according to students ...

Proposed Mars 'Icebreaker' mission detailed

Scientists supported by the Astrobiology Technology for Exploring Planets (ASTEP) and Astrobiology Instrument Development Programs (ASTID) have outlined the proposed 'Icebreaker' mission to Mars in a recent ...