Sentences with phrase «absorbing more energy»

But even after the input from the sun tapers off the surface is still absorbing more energy than it is losing so it continues to get warmer for a few hours.

It seems to me that young trees grow more quickly that older trees, thereby absorbing more energy per plant.

So the bigger tree will be absorbing more energy in the absolute, even if its proportional growth is less.

A quiet sun didn't stop the Earth from absorbing more energy than it released back into space.

Ocean heat content changes are potentially a great way to evaluate climate model results that suggest that the planet is currently significantly out of equilibrium (i.e. it is absorbing more energy than it is emitting).

Bottom line, absorbing more energy adds more heat to the system.

«Precise measurements of temperature within the ocean confirm that the Earth is absorbing more energy from sunlight than it emits back to space, providing perhaps the strongest evidence to date that rising concentrations of greenhouse gases and other pollutants are the primary cause of the current global warming trend.

To make matters worse, now - dark areas of open ocean — the result of retreating sea ice — are absorbing more energy from the sun.

This indicates that the ice sheet is absorbing more energy than normal, potentially leading to another record melt year — just two years after the 2010 record melt season.

Your engineer loses the plot from the beginning by assuming that the warming effect of CO2 is to do with the CO2 absorbing more energy than it emits.

Sea ice reflects most of the sun's energy, he explained, whereas the open ocean absorbs more energy, and thus the disappearance of sea ice triggers even more warming, in a positive - feedback loop called albedo.

«That means that the snow will absorb more energy and therefore melt faster.»

In that case, the plasmons are able to absorb more energy from the laser light, and less light is reflected.

These [gliding joints] allows the square tail structures to absorb more energy on impact.»

As the sun flushes heat into our atmosphere at a mind - boggling rate of 175 quadrillion watts, the air near the equator absorbs more energy than the air near the poles.

Kirchhoff's law doesn't apply to gases, because the greenhouse molecules can absorb more energy that they emit.

As running speeds increase, the hamstrings have to absorb more energy during the swing phase with every stride.

Since anthropogenic emitted CO2 comes out of a power plant stacks / vehicle exhausts at an elevated temperature (due to the trivial manmade waste heat energy), and then cools down to near equilibrium with the rest of the atmosphere, why would this new CO2 then absorb more energy and heatup again?

It is here that CO2 can absorb more energy than it emits.

(1A) It is here that CO2 can absorb more energy than it emits.

The ability of the GHGs to absorb more energy and vibrate more than O2 for example, is NOT used.

If the Earth absorbs more energy, its temperature rises, which causes it to radiate more energy back into space (Stefan - Boltzmann law) until it reaches equilibrium at a higher temperature.

Being at that temperature those GHGs can not absorb any more energy and the upward longwave gets a free pass out of the system.

When CO2 molecules (or any other GHGs) absorb more energy than those around them their higher temperature increases the spaces between them and adjoining molecules reducing density and causing them to rise until they reach a height where they are at the same temperature as surrounding molecules.

Greenhouse gases do absorb more energy than radiatively inert gases but they do not get any warmer.

*** I prefer to consider greenhouse gases and effectively lowering the surface albedo as, with a solid surface that doesn't evaporate in response to DWLIR the GHG causes the ground to absorb more energy than it otherwise would.

We now know that the planetary energy balance is determined by the upper levels of the troposphere and that the saturation of the absorption at the central frequency does not preclude the possibility to absorb more energy.

Which way absorbs more energy?

And so oceans can [and do] absorb more energy than land.

It seems to me, that the ocean absorbs more energy than compared land surfaces, much of the energy absorbed by the ocean, is used to evaporate water.

If the land could somehow transfer the heat, thereby cool the surface in some way, then it could absorb more energy.

If CO2 and H2O molecules now are cooled below the previous equilibrium point by having their radiation allowed to escape to outer space, then I believe these molecules must then tend to absorb more energy than yield energy with each interaction with the other components of the atmosphere until that atmosphere as a whole reaches a new thermal equilibrium where the net radiation going out and the net radiation coming in (primarily from the sun and the surrounding atmosphere) is the same.

Over the tropics where water vapour is high, the earth absorbs more energy than it radiates.

If you can prove that the earth as seen from space actually isn't -18 C or that earth's surface actually isn't +15 or that the ERBE data is wrong and the earth doesn't actually absorb more energy than ist radiates in areas of high ghg concentrations and that it does actually absorb more than it radiates in areas of low ghg concentration, then there might be some value in figuring out why via your experiments.

With warmer ocean temperatures, the hurricanes feed on the heat and can absorb more energy — sometimes called «weather on steroids.»

The oceans have absorbed more energy since we started measuring in 2004.

Open ocean absorbs more energy from sunlight than does ice or snow;

To accept, without thought, that we can create something that absorbs more energy than a blackbody... I still don't understand that.

Ian Schumacher (19:35:21): The Greenhouse Earth doesn't absorb more energy than a black body — in these models it is in equilibrium, with no nett absorption at all.

Since there has been no increase in T the total amount of energy flowing through the atmosphere at equilibrium remains the same as before but the GHGs have absorbed more energy so where is it?

Since they absorb more energy than non GHGs they spread energy more evenly across the whole area that they occupy.

What this tells me is that even with different energy input (SH absorbs more energy due to lower clear sky albedo) clouds regulated the albedo of both hemispheres to be equal, ie clouds actively control the surface temps, actually I should say that water vapor actively regulates surface temps.

This means the Earth absorbed more energy from solar radiation than it emitted as heat back to space.

Positive radiative forcing occurs when the Earth absorbs more energy from solar radiation than it emits as thermal radiation back to space.

I think it'd be neat to get my hands on that mystery material that absorbs more energy than it releases (or releases more energy than it absorbs) yet doesn't change temperature, I bet I could find some use for that.

Organic solar panels are the wave of the future since they are biodegradable and thin panels will be able to absorb more energy and be more viable for mass productiin than silicon based thick panels:

Gases with a higher GWP absorb more energy, per pound, than gases with a lower GWP, and thus contribute more to warming Earth.

I would agree with that, and also add that the results might only be saying that the earth / climate system absorbs more energy via impulses than via slowly changing forcings, which is a fairly normal property of a complex system if you think about it.

Not exact matches

Another benefit might be to make soldiers more stealthy at night, by absorbing some of the energy that makes them visible to infrared imaging devices.

Note: If using a dark colored pan, reduce the oven temperature, stated in the recipe, by 25 degrees F. (This is because dark colored pans absorb more of the energy coming from the oven walls so they become hotter and transmit heat faster than light colored pans.)