Sentences with phrase «about the greenhouse gas effect»

Not exact matches

Scientists knew about the warming effects of greenhouse gases, but proponents of global cooling argued that greenhouse warming would be more than offset by Earth's orbital changes.

7It is particularly ironic that Lomborg would offer such a ridiculously precise estimate of the cost of the impacts of climate change from carbon dioxide emissions, inasmuch as the entire thrust of his books chapter on «global warming» is that practically nothing about the effects of greenhouse gases is known with certainty.

However, it is the atmosphere with increased greenhouse gases which makes the additional insulation and this is what effects the changing radiative fluxes that we are talking about.

So whenever one talks about aerosols, one needs to put a caveat noting that greenhouse gases also come from fossil fuels and are the dominant effect.

The cooling effect from this aerosol forcing is thought to be about half that of greenhouse gases, but in the opposing (cooling) direction.

... The Earth's atmospheric methane concentration has increased by about 150 % since 1750, and it accounts for 20 % of the total radiative forcing from all of the long - lived and globally mixed greenhouse gases (these gases don't include water vapor which is by far the largest component of the greenhouse effect).

Carbon dioxide and sulfur gases blown extremely high into the atmosphere would have the opposite of a greenhouse effect: surface temperatures plummeting by more than 20 degrees Celsius, or about 40 degrees Fahrenheit.

However, the net effect in terms of forcing is only about 0.27 W / m ^ 2 — much less than greenhouse gas forcing.

Second, if C02 didn't matter («minor greenhouse gas»), there would never have been any reason to care about the «iris effect».

CC: NO, we are talking about how the anthropogenic addition of CO2 and other greenhouse gases to the atmosphere will effect global temperatures and hence climate.

If carbon dioxide and other long - lived greenhouse gases were not building up in the atmosphere, we would not be particularly worried about the climate effect from the short - lived gases and aerosols.

Re «Estimates of the drivers of global temperature change in the ice ages show that the changes in greenhouse gases (CO2, methane and nitrous oxide) made up about a third of the effect, amplifying the ice sheet changes by about 50 % (Köhler et al, 2010).»

The second example demonstrated that, out of 100 people, about 80 percent of them correctly identified the main greenhouse gas (76 % effect from CO2 plus 4 more people who identified water vapor).

I honestly think she's too young to be listening to me going on and on about such confusing stuff as oil, gas, coal, greenhouse effect, global warming, manmade climate change, population explosion (she knows about it), deforestation, desertification, rapid extinction of other species, pollution, problems, overconsumption, overindustrialization, problems, politics, economics, consumerism, and problems, religion, war, etc., etc., etc..

The proportion of forcing to CO2 amount eventually becomes linear as the amount of CO2 goes to zero — this is nothing special; any continuous smooth function can be approximated by a straight line over a sufficiently short interval; adding a sufficiently small amount of any greenhouse gas will have about half the effect as adding twice as much.

... In the late 1980s, there was a sense of the new about the greenhouse effect, even though scientists had been positing since the 1890s that heat - trapping gases, particularly carbon dioxide released by burning coal and other focal fuels could raise global temperatures.

The IPCC 2001 report states «Several recent reconstructions estimate that variations in solar irradiance give rise to a forcing at the Earth's surface of about 0.6 to 0.7 Wm - 2 since the Maunder Minimum and about half this over the 20th century... All reconstructions indicate that the direct effect of variations in solar forcing over the 20th century was about 20 to 25 % of the change in forcing due to increases in the well - mixed greenhouse gases.»

In these, despite the various minor ups and downs, the general trend is down until about 1850 CE when anthropogenic effects really started lifting the temperature, following the excess global warming (so - called greenhouse) gases.

They say their findings, which focused on the effect titling had on forest clearing and disturbance in the Peruvian Amazon between 2002 and 2005, suggest that the increasing trend towards decentralized forest governance via granting indigenous groups and other local communities formal legal title to their lands could play a key role in global efforts to slow both tropical forest destruction, which the researchers note is responsible for about the same amount of greenhouse gas emissions as the transportation sector, and climate change.»

Water vapor feedback can also amplify the warming effect of other greenhouse gases, such that the warming brought about by increased carbon dioxide allows more water vapor to enter the atmosphere.

Greenhouse Effect = +33.00 ⁰ C Water Vapour causes 95 % of the effect = 31.35 ⁰ C Other Greenhouse gases cause 5 % of the Effect = 1.65 ⁰ C CO2 is about 75 % of the Effect of all GHGs = 1.Effect = +33.00 ⁰ C Water Vapour causes 95 % of the effect = 31.35 ⁰ C Other Greenhouse gases cause 5 % of the Effect = 1.65 ⁰ C CO2 is about 75 % of the Effect of all GHGs = 1.effect = 31.35 ⁰ C Other Greenhouse gases cause 5 % of the Effect = 1.65 ⁰ C CO2 is about 75 % of the Effect of all GHGs = 1.Effect = 1.65 ⁰ C CO2 is about 75 % of the Effect of all GHGs = 1.Effect of all GHGs = 1.24 ⁰ C

These feedbacks and their complex relations make me sceptical about our ability to predict what effects our greenhouse gas emissions have on the climate.

«Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95 % of Earth's greenhouse effect (5).»

It's immediately clear that climate models are unable to resolve any thermal effect of greenhouse gas emissions or tell us anything about future air temperatures.

I'd like to stick to facts: * CO2 levels are rising because we emit CO2 (so we can do something about it) * CO2 is a greenhouse gas * CO2 thus contributes to warming of the surface * Other effects compensate or amplify these changes * Those other effects haven't reversed / stopped the warming trend yet

John Carter August 8, 2014 at 12:58 am chooses to state his position on the greenhouse effect in the following 134 word sentence: «But given the [1] basics of the greenhouse effect, the fact that with just a very small percentage of greenhouse gas molecules in the air this effect keeps the earth about 55 - 60 degrees warmer than it would otherwise be, and the fact that through easily recognizable if [2] inadvertent growing patterns we have at this point probably at least [3] doubled the total collective amount in heat absorption and re-radiation capacity of long lived atmospheric greenhouse gases (nearly doubling total that of the [4] leading one, carbon dioxide, in the modern era), to [5] levels not collectively seen on earth in several million years — levels that well predated the present ice age and extensive earth surface ice conditions — it goes [6] against basic physics and basic geologic science to not be «predisposed» to the idea that this would ultimately impact climate.»

The nation is once again assessing how best to stimulate the deployment of advanced energy technologies in response to recent high energy prices — caused by the growing world demand for energy, wars in the Middle East, and last year's hurricanes — and concerns about the adverse environmental effects, particularly greenhouse gas emissions, of using conventional fossil energy.

The nation's current energy portfolio has raised concerns about the adverse environmental effects of energy generation — particularly greenhouse gas emissions from coal - fired and oil - fired power plants and the long - term storage of spent nuclear fuel.

On the other hand, despite the overwhelming evidence that global warming will transform the Earth's climate for centuries, with fearful consequences for human health and wellbeing (not to mention the survival of many species and ecosystems), the world can not agree to significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions because of concerns about the effects on economic growth.

In the scorching summer of 1988, when global warming first hit headlines in a significant way, presidential candidate George H.W. Bush used a Michigan speech to pledge meaningful action curbing heat - trapping greenhouse gases, saying, «Those who think we are powerless to do anything about the greenhouse effect forget about the White House effect.»

Looking in a textbook about atmospheric physics, meteorology or climate physics it is getting quite clear that atmospheres are more complex then just reducing their thermal structure on the effects of solar radiation and greenhouse gases alone.

While the greenhouse gas footprint of the production of other foods, compared to sources such as livestock, is highly dependent on a number of factors, production of livestock currently accounts for about 30 % of the U.S. total emissions of methane.316, 320,325,326 This amount of methane can be reduced somewhat by recovery methods such as the use of biogas digesters, but future changes in dietary practices, including those motivated by considerations other than climate change mitigation, could also have an effect on the amount of methane emitted to the atmosphere.327

The trend in greenhouse gas forcing is about 0.045 W / m ^ 2 / year — a small effect adding incrementally to heat in the atmosphere.

The latest research suggests that it amounts to about 4 percent of the «radiative forcing,» which is the fancy term scientists use to talk about the overall warming effects of greenhouse gases.

The history of climate change goes back much further: in the 19th century, physicists theorised about the role of greenhouse gases, chiefly carbon dioxide, in the atmosphere, and several suggested that the warming effect would increase alongside the levels of these gases in the atmosphere.

While changes in solar output have slightly increased global average temperature since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the planet - warming effect of man - made greenhouse gases is about 20 times larger -LRB-

Since the temperature increase dates from the beginning of the industrial age and the warming apparently accelerates as greenhouse gasses accumulate in the atmosphere (picture below this), it is used as strong evidence of cause and effect and projected into the future (which I'll write about later).

Now, if there is any kind of greenhouse effect caused greenhouse gas, the strongest affect should occur about 1 meter or less above the ocean, mainly at night.

Since the greenhouse effect is all about how energy escapes from the atmosphere to space, CO2 and other well - mixed greenhouse gases have more «leverage», so to speak, than does water.

Yet its absorptive tholin stratosphere interrupts so much solar energy that Titan's final surface temperature suffers from what is called an «anti-greenhouse effect» — ironically brought about by «greenhouse gases».

Or I could say, greenhouse effect theory should be about a «greenhouse liquid» rather than all the focus of greenhouse gases.

If you're going to argue with them about gravity you need to first point out they don't have any, because they have created an entirely imaginary world for their Greenhouse Effect of imaginary molecules without the real gas properties which make real gases subject to gravity.

And what exactly would be changed, if the public were educated about aerosols and greenhouse gases and temperature histories and the fact that at least 50 % of the 0.5 - 0.9 C change compared to 200 years ago is with 90 to 99 % likelihood due to the net effect of anthropogenic factors?

Raising the alarm about climate change has been tried before, many times in fact, but it has not had an appreciable effect on greenhouse gas emissions.

Earth's Greenhouse Effect is described as all about radiant effects: Wiki: «The greenhouse effect is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by atmospheric greenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all dGreenhouse Effect is described as all about radiant effects: Wiki: «The greenhouse effect is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by atmospheric greenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all direcEffect is described as all about radiant effects: Wiki: «The greenhouse effect is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by atmospheric greenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all dgreenhouse effect is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by atmospheric greenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all direceffect is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by atmospheric greenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all dgreenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all directions.

While CO2 is indeed a greenhouse gas, increasing concentrations of which may be expected to have (other things being equal) a warming effect, scientists disagree about how large that effect may be (this is particularly affected by ignorance of the effect of clouds).

Greenhouse gas externalities will not be fully priced in for decades, especially for costs imposed on areas outside of the country where the gases are produced (why should we care about those effects?)

Wouldn't that be more interesting than getting people — who are quite frankly in denial and in the minority — to argue against scientists about whether the greenhouse gas effect is even true?

It asserts that manmade greenhouse gases do not play a «substantial role» in climate change and that previous reports about the effects of global warming overestimated the situation and «failed to incorporate chemical and biological processes, which are as important as the physical ones.»

I was speaking sloppily about one factor of a trinity consisting of differential heating (greenhouse effect), convection and other mechanisms for heat transfer, and gravity that together make a self consistent troposphere that tops out roughly where the greenhouse gases become transparent and greenhouse cooling of the upper troposphere goes away.