Jeff Masters has been telling us that more CO2 causes more precipitation – due to larger amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere. Now we find out that more CO2 also causes less precipitation due to a drier atmosphere.
Public release date: 24-Mar-2011
Contact: Ken Caldeira
kcaldeira@carnegie.stanford.edu
650-704-7212
Carnegie InstitutionCutting carbon dioxide helps prevent drying
Washington, D.C.—Recent climate modeling has shown that reducing the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would give the Earth a wetter climate in the short term. New research from Carnegie Global Ecology scientists Long Cao and Ken Caldeira offers a novel explanation for why climates are wetter when atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations are decreasing. Their findings, published online today by Geophysical Research Letters, show that cutting carbon dioxide concentrations could help prevent droughts caused by global warming.
Cao and Caldeira’s new work shows that this precipitation increase is due to the heat-trapping property of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide traps heat in the middle of the atmosphere. This warm air higher in the atmosphere tends to prevent the rising air motions that create thunderstorms and rainfall.
As a result, an increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide tends to suppress precipitation. Similarly, a decrease in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide tends to increase precipitation.
The results of this study show that cutting the concentration of precipitation-suppressing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would increase global precipitation. This is important because scientists are concerned that unchecked global warming could cause already dry areas to get drier. (Global warming may also cause wet areas to get wetter.) Cao and Caldeira’s findings indicate that reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide could prevent droughts caused by climate change.
“This study shows that the climate is going to be drier on the way up and wetter on the way down,” Caldeira said, adding:”Proposals to cool the earth using geo-engineering tools to reflect sunlight back to space would not cause a similar pulse of wetness.”
The team’s work shows that carbon dioxide rapidly affects the structure of the atmosphere, causing quick changes precipitation, as well as many other aspects of Earth’s climate, well before the greenhouse gas noticeably affects temperature. These results have important implications for understanding the effects of climate change caused by carbon dioxide, as well as the potential effects of reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations.
“The direct effects of carbon dioxide on precipitation take place quickly,” said Cao. “If we could cut carbon dioxide concentrations now, we would see precipitation increase within the year, but it would take many decades for climate to cool.”
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-03/ci-ccd032411.php
h/t to suyts
lol, I’ll copy my post from Anthony’s……..
“Cao and Caldeira’s new work shows that this precipitation increase is due to the heat-trapping property of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide and,
an increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide tends to suppress precipitation.”
And that ladies and gentlemen is wetdry! What’s not to understand? This is exactly as Dr. Syme intuitively knew. Apparently, the dept. of lexicography has some spies and others are beating him to publication.
This is getting downright silly! I’ll add this to my list of contradictory research.
The science is settled I tells ya!
lol, yeh, this is a two-fer! Both contradictions are in the same paper! It doesn’t get any better than that!
Think, maybe, perhaps, it just might be true? Hummmmm… maybe it has a lot to do with where you’re standing too. Maybe? Perhaps? It’s still a fairly big planet, at least if you’re the size most people are. There’s just too, too much to ponder these days… Toto, I think the Magic Slippers have landed us on a different Earth in another dimension. Let’s get out of here.
Poor Dorthy. Poor Toto. Kansas tornadoes can be harsh.
Awesome, you can blame anything on CO2 just by being vague enough.
I particularly like the suppressed precipitation caused by CO2 all the while increasing precipitation due to the properties of CO2!
“Climate modelling has shown that”…has actual observation shown that?
“carbon dioxide concentrations COULD help prevent droughts caused by global warming” Then again, they could not.
“Proposals to cool the earth using geo-engineering tools to reflect sunlight back to space would not cause a similar pulse of wetness.” Notice how definite that statement is. I’d have to agree…except that nobody knows the answer.
“These results have important implications for understanding the effects of climate change caused by carbon dioxide, as well as the potential effects of reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations”…Implications, yes. But no really meaty INDICATIONS. Potential effects? Can’t we just come out and say NO effects?
“If we could cut carbon dioxide concentrations now, we would see precipitation increase within the year, but it would take many decades for climate to cool.” We would? It Would? If we COULD, we WOULD also be freezing in the dark on a horse-drawn cart.
So, increasing CO2 will make the world drier, except in places like Birsbane and Nashville, that were subjected to the drywet phenomena.
How much were these clowns paid (with our tax money) to write this blather?
Steve please stop! Go for a bike ride. I can’t take this any more, first warmcold then wetdry, I guess we’ll soon find out what’s next.
“It rained all night the day I left,
the weather it was dry;
The sun so hot I froze to death,
Susanna don’t you cry.”
😉
The Magic of Peer reviewed Science in ALL of its Glory!!!!!
I wonder if they had Tangerine skies with pink clouds!
I think Cao and Calderia are not saying that a decrease in CO2 in itself would cause an increase in precipitiation- it’s the CHANGE in CO2 that causes the precipitation increase. That precipitation increase would stop once CO2 hits zero and we’re all dead.
Incidentally, there’s a major diurnal change in CO2 levels at ground level- there’s an increase in CO2 at night as animals and plants breathe in oxygen and breathek out CO2 and water vapor. During the day this reverses, as photosynthesis by plants overwhelms the production of CO2 by the breathing of both plants and animals. So is there an increase in precipitation in the morning as plants use photosynthesis, and a decrease at night as photosynthesis stops? Or does the warming from sunlight overwhelm the diurnal drop in CO2?
Interesting line of thought, but I don’t think it relates well to Cao and Calderia’s doublethink, read what they said again,
“precipitation increase is due to the heat-trapping property of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide” and,
an increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide tends to suppress precipitation.”
Here is the abstract from the paper.
There appears to be an increase in moisture but not from C02 – it’s got to be urine!
P*ss-poor science seems to increase the prevalence of even more p*ss-poor science flooding academia with the infinitely ludicrous stench of zero standards and laughable models… Crap science is its own reward… 😉
Great sense of humour, thanks for the great parody!