It has been suggested that cloud forcing be merged into this article. (Discuss) Proposed since April 2024. |
Cloud feedback is a type of climate change feedback that has been difficult to quantify in climate models. Clouds can either amplify or dampen the effects of climate change by influencing Earth's energy balance. This is because clouds can affect the magnitude of climate change resulting from external radiative forcings. [1] On the other hand, clouds can affect the magnitude of internally generated climate variability. [2] [3] Climate models represent clouds in different ways, and small changes in cloud cover in the models have a large impact on the predicted climate. [4] [5] Changes in cloud cover are closely coupled with other feedbacks, including the water vapor feedback and ice–albedo feedback.
Climate change is expected to change the distribution and type of clouds. This can relate to "the spectrum of cloud types, the cloud fraction and height, the radiative properties of clouds, and finally the Earth’s radiation budget". [6] : 2224 If cloud cover increases, more sunlight will be reflected back into space, cooling the planet. If clouds become higher and thinner, they act as an insulator, reflecting heat from below back downwards and warming the planet. [7]
Seen from below, clouds emit infrared radiation back to the surface, and so exert a warming effect. But seen from above, clouds reflect sunlight and emit infrared radiation to space, and so exert a cooling effect. [8] Differences in planetary boundary layer cloud modeling can lead to large differences in calculated values of climate sensitivity. A model that decreases boundary layer clouds in response to global warming has a climate sensitivity twice that of a model that does not include this feedback. [9] However, satellite data shows that cloud optical thickness actually increases with increasing temperature. [10] Whether the net effect is warming or cooling depends on details such as the type and altitude of the cloud; details that are difficult to represent in climate models.
In preparation for the 2021 IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, a new generation of climate models have been developed by scientific groups around the world. [11] [12] The average estimated climate sensitivity has increased in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) compared to the previous generation. Values range from 1.8 to 5.6 °C (3.2 to 10.1 °F) across 27 global climate models. [13] [14] The cause of the increased equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) lies mainly in improved modelling of clouds. Temperature rises are now believed to cause sharper decreases in the number of low clouds, and fewer low clouds means more sunlight is absorbed by the planet and less reflected to space. [13] [15] [16]
According to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, cloud feedback is "a climate feedback involving changes in any of the properties of clouds as a response to a change in the local or global surface temperature". [6] : 2224
Changes in climate may "affect the spectrum of cloud types, the cloud fraction and height, the radiative properties of clouds, and finally the Earth’s radiation budget". [6] : 2224 All of these factors have an impact on the magnitude of cloud feedback and whether it is positive (amplifying) or negative (reducing).
Global warming is expected to change the distribution and type of clouds. Seen from below, clouds emit infrared radiation back to the surface, and so exert a warming effect; seen from above, clouds reflect sunlight and emit infrared radiation to space, and so exert a cooling effect. Whether the net effect is warming or cooling depends on details such as the type and altitude of the cloud. Low clouds are brighter and optically thicker, while high clouds are optically thin (transparent) in the visible and trap IR. Reduction of low clouds tends to increase incoming solar radiation and therefore have a positive feedback, while a reduction in high clouds (since they mostly just trap IR) would result in a negative feedback. These details were poorly observed before the advent of satellite data and are difficult to represent in climate models. [20] Global climate models were showing a near-zero to moderately strong positive net cloud feedback, but the effective climate sensitivity has increased substantially in the latest generation of global climate models. Differences in the physical representation of clouds in models drive this enhanced climate sensitivity relative to the previous generation of models. [21] [22] [23]
A 2019 simulation predicts that if greenhouse gases reach three times the current level of atmospheric carbon dioxide that stratocumulus clouds could abruptly disperse, contributing to additional global warming. [24] [25]Atmospheric aerosols—fine partices suspended in the air—affect cloud formation and properties, which also alters their impact on climate. While some aerosols, such as black carbon particles, make the clouds darker and thus contribute to warming, [26] by far the strongest effect is from sulfates, which increase the number of cloud droplets, making the clouds more reflective, and helping them cool the climate more. That is known as a direct aerosol effect; however, aerosols also have an indirect effect on liquid water path, and determing it involves computationally heavy continuous calculations of evaporation and condensation within clouds. Climate models generally assume that aerosols increase liquid water path, which makes the clouds even more reflective. [27] However, satellite observations taken in 2010s suggested that aerosols decreased liquid water path instead, and in 2018, this was reproduced in a model which integrated more complex cloud microphysics. [28] Yet, 2019 research found that earlier satellite observations were biased by failing to account for the thickest, most water-heavy clouds naturally raining more and shedding more particulates: very strong aerosol cooling was seen when comparing clouds of the same thickness. [29]
Moreover, large-scale observations can be confounded by changes in other atmospheric factors, like humidity: i.e. it was found that while post-1980 improvements in air quality would have reduced the number of clouds over the East Coast of the United States by around 20%, this was offset by the increase in relative humidity caused by atmospheric response to AMOC slowdown. [30] Similarly, while the initial research looking at sulfates from the 2014–2015 eruption of Bárðarbunga found that they caused no change in liquid water path, [31] it was later suggested that this finding was confounded by counteracting changes in humidity. [30]
To avoid confounders, many observations of aerosol effects focus on ship tracks, but post-2020 research found that visible ship tracks are a poor proxy for other clouds, and estimates derived from them overestimate aerosol cooling by as much as 200%. [32] At the same time, other research found that the majority of ship tracks are "invisible" to satellites, meaning that the earlier research had underestimated aerosol cooling by overlooking them. [33] Finally, 2023 research indicates that all climate models have underestimated sulfur emissions from volcanoes which occur in the background, outside of major eruptions, and so had consequently overestimated the cooling provided by anthropogenic aerosols, especially in the Arctic climate. [34]
Estimates of how much aerosols affect cloud cooling are very important, because the amount of sulfate aerosols in the air had undergone dramatic changes in the recent decades. First, it had increased greatly from 1950s to 1980s, largely due to the widespread burning of sulfur-heavy coal, which caused an observable reduction in visible sunlight that had been described as global dimming. [36] [37] Then, it started to decline substantially from the 1990s onwards and is expected to continue to decline in the future, due to the measures to combat acid rain and other impacts of air pollution. [38] Consequently, the aerosols provided a considerable cooling effect which counteracted or "masked" some of the greenhouse effect from human emissions, and this effect had been declining as well, which contributed to acceleration of climate change. [39] Climate models do account for the presence of aerosols and their recent and future decline in their projections, and typically estimate that the cooling they provide in 2020s is similar to the warming from human-added atmospheric methane, meaning that simultaneous reductions in both would effectively cancel each other out. [40] However, the existing uncertainty about aerosol-cloud interactions likewise introduces uncertainty into models, particularly when concerning predictions of changes in weather events over the regions with a poorer historical record of atmospheric observations. [41] [37] [42] [43]
Changes in cloud cover is one of several contributors to climate change and climate sensitivity.
The radiative forcing caused by a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels (from the pre-industrial 280 ppm) is approximately 3.7 watts per square meter (W/m2). In the absence of feedbacks, the energy imbalance would eventually result in roughly 1 °C (1.8 °F) of global warming. That figure is straightforward to calculate by using the Stefan–Boltzmann law [44] [45] and is undisputed. [46]
A further contribution arises from climate feedbacks, both self-reinforcing and balancing. [47] [48] The uncertainty in climate sensitivity estimates is entirely from the modelling of feedbacks in the climate system, including water vapour feedback, ice–albedo feedback, cloud feedback, and lapse rate feedback. [46] Balancing feedbacks tend to counteract warming by increasing the rate at which energy is radiated to space from a warmer planet. Exacerbating feedbacks increase warming; for example, higher temperatures can cause ice to melt, which reduces the ice area and the amount of sunlight the ice reflects, which in turn results in less heat energy being radiated back into space. Climate sensitivity depends on the balance between those feedbacks. [45]When the IPCC began to produce its IPCC Sixth Assessment Report in 2020, many climate models began to show a higher climate sensitivity. The estimates for Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity changed from 3.2 °C to 3.7 °C and the estimates for the Transient climate response from 1.8 °C, to 2.0 °C. That is probably because of better understanding of the role of clouds and aerosols. [49]
In preparation for the 2021 IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, a new generation of climate models have been developed by scientific groups around the world. [11] [12] The average estimated climate sensitivity has increased in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) compared to the previous generation, with values spanning 1.8 to 5.6 °C (3.2 to 10.1 °F) across 27 global climate models and exceeding 4.5 °C (8.1 °F) in 10 of them. [13] [14] The cause of the increased equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) lies mainly in improved modelling of clouds. Temperature rises are now believed to cause sharper decreases in the number of low clouds, and fewer low clouds means more sunlight is absorbed by the planet and less reflected to space. [13] [15] [16] Models with the highest ECS values, however, are not consistent with observed warming. [50]
A 2019 simulation predicts that if greenhouse gases reach three times the current level of atmospheric carbon dioxide that stratocumulus clouds could abruptly disperse, contributing to additional global warming. [51]
In addition to how clouds themselves will respond to increased temperatures, other feedbacks affect clouds properties and formation. The amount and vertical distribution of water vapor is closely linked to the formation of clouds. Ice crystals have been shown to largely influence the amount of water vapor. [52] Water vapor in the subtropical upper troposphere has been linked to the convection of water vapor and ice. Changes in subtropical humidity could provide a negative feedback that decreases the amount of water vapor which in turn would act to mediate global climate transitions. [53]
Changes in cloud cover are closely coupled with other feedback, including the water vapor feedback and ice–albedo feedback. Changing climate is expected to alter the relationship between cloud ice and supercooled cloud water, which in turn would influence the microphysics of the cloud which would result in changes in the radiative properties of the cloud. Climate models suggest that a warming will increase fractional cloudiness. The albedo of increased cloudiness cools the climate, resulting in a negative feedback; while the reflection of infrared radiation by clouds warms the climate, resulting in a positive feedback. [54] Increasing temperatures in the polar regions is expected in increase the amount of low-level clouds, whose stratification prevents the convection of moisture to upper levels. This feedback would partially cancel the increased surface warming due to the cloudiness. This negative feedback has less effect than the positive feedback. The upper atmosphere more than cancels negative feedback that causes cooling, and therefore the increase of CO2 is actually exacerbating the positive feedback as more CO2 enters the system. [55]
The scientific community has been investigating the causes of climate change for decades. After thousands of studies, it came to a consensus, where it is "unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land since pre-industrial times." This consensus is supported by around 200 scientific organizations worldwide, The dominant role in this climate change has been played by the direct emissions of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels. Indirect CO2 emissions from land use change, and the emissions of methane, nitrous oxide and other greenhouse gases play major supporting roles.
The greenhouse effect occurs when greenhouse gases in a planet's atmosphere insulate the planet from losing heat to space, raising its surface temperature. Surface heating can happen from an internal heat source as in the case of Jupiter, or from its host star as in the case of the Earth. In the case of Earth, the Sun emits shortwave radiation (sunlight) that passes through greenhouse gases to heat the Earth's surface. In response, the Earth's surface emits longwave radiation (heat) that is mostly absorbed by greenhouse gases. That heat absorption reduces the rate at which the Earth can cool off in response to being warmed by the Sun. Adding to greenhouse gases further reduces the rate a planet emits radiation to space, raising its average surface temperature.
Numerical climate models are mathematical models that can simulate the interactions of important drivers of climate. These drivers are the atmosphere, oceans, land surface and ice. Scientists use climate models to study the dynamics of the climate system and to make projections of future climate and of climate change. Climate models can also be qualitative models and contain narratives, largely descriptive, of possible futures.
The sulfate or sulphate ion is a polyatomic anion with the empirical formula SO2−4. Salts, acid derivatives, and peroxides of sulfate are widely used in industry. Sulfates occur widely in everyday life. Sulfates are salts of sulfuric acid and many are prepared from that acid.
Global dimming is a decline in the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface, a measure also known as global direct solar irradiance. It was observed soon after the first systematic measurements of solar irradiance began in the 1950s, and continued until 1980s, with an observed reduction of 4–5% per decade, even though solar activity did not vary more than the usual at the time. Instead, global dimming had been attributed to an increase in atmospheric particulate matter, predominantly sulfate aerosols, as the result of rapidly growing air pollution due to post-war industrialization. After 1980s, reductions in particulate emissions have also caused a "partial" reversal of the dimming trend, which has sometimes been described as a global brightening. This reversal is not yet complete, and it has also been globally uneven, as some of the brightening over the developed countries in the 1980s and 1990s had been counteracted by the increased dimming from the industrialization of the developing countries and the expansion of the global shipping industry, although they have also been making rapid progress in cleaning up air pollution in the recent years.
Radiative forcing is a concept used in climate science to quantify the change in energy balance in the Earth's atmosphere caused by various factors, such as concentrations of greenhouse gases, aerosols, and changes in solar radiation. In more technical terms, it is "the change in the net, downward minus upward, radiative flux due to a change in an external driver of climate change." These external drivers are distinguished from feedbacks and variability that are internal to the climate system, and that further influence the direction and magnitude of imbalance.
Earth's energy budget accounts for the balance between the energy that Earth receives from the Sun and the energy the Earth loses back into outer space. Smaller energy sources, such as Earth's internal heat, are taken into consideration, but make a tiny contribution compared to solar energy. The energy budget also accounts for how energy moves through the climate system. Because the Sun heats the equatorial tropics more than the polar regions, received solar irradiance is unevenly distributed. As the energy seeks equilibrium across the planet, it drives interactions in Earth's climate system, i.e., Earth's water, ice, atmosphere, rocky crust, and all living things. The result is Earth's climate.
Climate sensitivity is a key measure in climate science and describes how much Earth's surface will warm for a doubling in the atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration. Its formal definition is: "The change in the surface temperature in response to a change in the atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration or other radiative forcing." This concept helps scientists understand the extent and magnitude of the effects of climate change.
The iris hypothesis was a hypothesis proposed by Richard Lindzen and colleagues in 2001 that suggested increased sea surface temperature in the tropics would result in reduced cirrus clouds and thus more infrared radiation leakage from Earth's atmosphere. His study of observed changes in cloud coverage and modeled effects on infrared radiation released to space as a result seemed to support the hypothesis. This suggested infrared radiation leakage was hypothesized to be a negative feedback in which an initial warming would result in an overall cooling of the surface.
Earth's climate system is a complex system with five interacting components: the atmosphere (air), the hydrosphere (water), the cryosphere, the lithosphere and the biosphere. Climate is the statistical characterization of the climate system. It represents the average weather, typically over a period of 30 years, and is determined by a combination of processes, such as ocean currents and wind patterns. Circulation in the atmosphere and oceans transports heat from the tropical regions to regions that receive less energy from the Sun. Solar radiation is the main driving force for this circulation. The water cycle also moves energy throughout the climate system. In addition, certain chemical elements are constantly moving between the components of the climate system. Two examples for these biochemical cycles are the carbon and nitrogen cycles.
In climate science, longwave radiation (LWR) is electromagnetic thermal radiation emitted by Earth's surface, atmosphere, and clouds. It may also be referred to as terrestrial radiation. This radiation is in the infrared portion of the spectrum, but is distinct from the shortwave (SW) near-infrared radiation found in sunlight.
Polar amplification is the phenomenon that any change in the net radiation balance tends to produce a larger change in temperature near the poles than in the planetary average. This is commonly referred to as the ratio of polar warming to tropical warming. On a planet with an atmosphere that can restrict emission of longwave radiation to space, surface temperatures will be warmer than a simple planetary equilibrium temperature calculation would predict. Where the atmosphere or an extensive ocean is able to transport heat polewards, the poles will be warmer and equatorial regions cooler than their local net radiation balances would predict. The poles will experience the most cooling when the global-mean temperature is lower relative to a reference climate; alternatively, the poles will experience the greatest warming when the global-mean temperature is higher.
Marine cloud brightening also known as marine cloud seeding and marine cloud engineering is a proposed solar radiation management climate engineering technique that would make clouds brighter, reflecting a small fraction of incoming sunlight back into space in order to offset anthropogenic global warming. Along with stratospheric aerosol injection, it is one of the two solar radiation management methods that may most feasibly have a substantial climate impact. The intention is that increasing the Earth's albedo, in combination with greenhouse gas emissions reduction, carbon dioxide removal, and adaptation, would reduce climate change and its risks to people and the environment. If implemented, the cooling effect is expected to be felt rapidly and to be reversible on fairly short time scales. However, technical barriers remain to large-scale marine cloud brightening. There are also risks with such modification of complex climate systems.
Ice–albedo feedback is a positive feedback climate process where a change in the area of ice caps, glaciers, and sea ice alters the albedo and surface temperature of a planet. Because ice is very reflective, it reflects far more solar energy back to space than open water or any other land cover. It occurs on Earth, and can also occur on exoplanets.
Stratospheric aerosol injection is a proposed method of solar geoengineering to reduce global warming. This would introduce aerosols into the stratosphere to create a cooling effect via global dimming and increased albedo, which occurs naturally from volcanic winter. It appears that stratospheric aerosol injection, at a moderate intensity, could counter most changes to temperature and precipitation, take effect rapidly, have low direct implementation costs, and be reversible in its direct climatic effects. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concludes that it "is the most-researched [solar geoengineering] methodagreement that it could limit warming to below 1.5 °C (2.7 °F)." However, like other solar geoengineering approaches, stratospheric aerosol injection would do so imperfectly and other effects are possible, particularly if used in a suboptimal manner.
The history of the scientific discovery of climate change began in the early 19th century when ice ages and other natural changes in paleoclimate were first suspected and the natural greenhouse effect was first identified. In the late 19th century, scientists first argued that human emissions of greenhouse gases could change Earth's energy balance and climate. The existence of the greenhouse effect, while not named as such, was proposed as early as 1824 by Joseph Fourier. The argument and the evidence were further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838. In 1856 Eunice Newton Foote demonstrated that the warming effect of the sun is greater for air with water vapour than for dry air, and the effect is even greater with carbon dioxide.
Climate change feedbacks are effects of global warming that amplify or diminish the effect of forces that initially cause the warming. Positive feedbacks enhance global warming while negative feedbacks weaken it. Feedbacks are important in the understanding of climate change because they play an important part in determining the sensitivity of the climate to warming forces. Climate forcings and feedbacks together determine how much and how fast the climate changes. Large positive feedbacks can lead to tipping points—abrupt or irreversible changes in the climate system—depending upon the rate and magnitude of the climate change.
Gabriele Clarissa Hegerl is a German climatologist. She is a professor of climate system science at the University of Edinburgh School of GeoSciences. Prior to 2007 she held research positions at Texas A&M University and at Duke University's Nicholas School of the Environment, during which time she was a co-ordinating lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth and Fifth Assessment Report.
Joyce Penner is an atmospheric scientist known for her research on climate change, especially on the impact of aerosols and clouds.
Fixed anvil temperature hypothesis is a physical hypothesis that describes the response of cloud radiative properties to rising surface temperatures. It presumes that the temperature at which radiation is emitted by anvil clouds is constrained by radiative processes and thus does not change in response to surface warming. Since the amount of radiation emitted by clouds is a function of their temperature, it implies that it does not increase with surface warming and thus a warmer surface does not increase radiation emissions by cloud tops. The mechanism has been identified both in climate models and observations of cloud behaviour, it affects how much the world heats up for each extra tonne of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. However, some evidence suggests that it may be more correctly formulated as decreased anvil warming rather than no anvil warming.
Interestingly, the true feedback is consistently weaker than the constant relative humidity value, implying a small but robust reduction in relative humidity in all models on average clouds appear to provide a positive feedback in all models