Sentences with phrase «absorbs less radiation»

The clumped matter absorbs less radiation than when it floated freely in space.

Not exact matches

Chloroplasts alone absorb light only from the visible portion of the solar spectrum, allowing access to only about 50 % of the incident solar energy radiation, and less than 10 % of full sunlight saturates the capacity of the photosynthetic apparatus.

Solar radiation management attempts to offset effects of greenhouse gases by causing Earth to absorb less solar radiation.

The larger grains create a less reflective surface that allows more solar radiation to be absorbed.

Tinetti says the earlier studies could be a product of the planets» bright sides cooking to the same temperature throughout, which makes atmospheric molecules less likely to absorb radiation from below.

To a much lesser extent, aerosols also absorb infrared radiation reflected back from the ground.

Less white ice and more dark sea means that more solar radiation is absorbed, accelerating the thaw.

The only aerosol type we can measure more or less directly is black carbon, since we have an instrument that can detect radiation - absorbing particles, and black carbon is the main particle type that absorbs radiation.

Whether being lesser than CO2 in number of molecules in the atmosphere, methane is a potent greenhouse gas absorbing more infra - red radiation per molecule than CO2.

So with more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, we expect to see less longwave radiation escaping to space at the wavelengths that carbon dioxide absorb.

If the temperature below is warmer than the local temperature, IR radiation that is re-radiated is less than is absorbed, the net effect of the greenhouse gases is to warm that layer.

CO2 (and some other gases) in the atmosphere are however more opaque to LWIR; they absorb that a chunk of that outgoing radiation and re-radiate it in all directions — so that a fraction less than half is re-radiated downwards; which has the effect of slowing the transfer of heat (by radiation) out of the atmosphere.

The frequency at which photons are emitted or absorbed is small relative to the rate of energy redistribution among molecules and their modes, so the fraction of some molecules that are excited in some way is only slightly more or less than the characteristic fraction for that temperature (depending on whether photons absorption to generate that particular state is greater than photon emission from that state or vice versa, which depends on the brightness temperature of the incident radiation relative to the local temperature).

Less TOA cooling will occur if bands are placed where, in the upper atmosphere or near TOA, they absorb more of the increases in radiation from below from surface + tropospheric (+ lower stratospheric) warming.

1) Greenhouse gasses absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere and re-emit much of it back toward the surface, thus warming the planet (less heat escapes; Fourier, 1824).

Likewise, CO2 at a mean temperature less than the earth's brightness temperature still absorbs radiation.

It is true that this lost solar heating now adds to the LW flux coming from below, but the skin layer only absorbs a tiny fraction of that, so the increase in absorped LW flux from below is less than the decrease in the absorbed SW radiation.

Actually, though, most of the OLR originates from below the tropopause (can get up around 18 km in the tropics, generally lower)-- with a majority of solar radiation absorbed at the surface, a crude approximation can be made that the area emitting to space is less than 2 * (20/6371) * 100 % ~ = 0.628 % more than the area heated by the sun, so the OLR per unit area should be well within about 0.6 % of the value calculated without the Earth's curvature (I'm guessing it would actually be closer to if not less than 0.3 % different).

Less well appreciated is that clouds (made of ice particles and / or liquid water droplets) also absorb infrared radiation and contribute to the greenhouse effect, too.

Plankton is largest CO2 absorber, but also oceans are near or largest (by far largest in the more distant past) CO2 emitters, so if CO2 happen to be an important factor than: High UV / radiation = reduction in plankton = less CO2 absorbed = warming, reverse holds true.

Less often, the CO2 will re-emit infrared radiation in a random direction, either to be absorbed again, or to escape from Earth's atmosphere altogether.

Cooler glazing temperatures would indicate that collector heated air is not working its way out to the glazing and warming it, and / or that the glazing was seeing less radiation heating from the absorber screens.

This condition exists in spite of the fact that the high reflectivity of the Venusian clouds causes the planet to absorb less solar radiation than Earth.

So with more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, we expect to see less longwave radiation escaping to space at the wavelengths that carbon dioxide absorb.

The stratosphere cools when ozone is destroyed because there is less ozone to absorb UV radiation.

That way the collector absorbs solar radiation with high efficiency but emits far less thermal radiation.

The reason, Werner said, is because the loss of snow and ice makes the earth's surface less reflective, meaning solar radiation — or heat — is absorbed in greater amounts by the exposed dark ocean or tundra.

Co2 can only cause the effect where there is extra radiation for it to absorb, in the low sunlight model there is less available radiation in the bandwidths that would already be more than saturated by elevated co2.

The lower sunlight means less radiation to be absorbed by co2, you can not make up for lower input because there is a limit on availability of radiation to absorb by co2.

In bands where greenhouse gases (or clouds) absorb a lot, there is less, not more, infrared radiation escaping into space.

The back - radiation can not be more energetic than the source, and in fact, must be of lesser energetic state than the original source, for it has shed some energy by collision with other forms of matter (absorbed, re-radiated, etc...).

The resulting cold conditions around the world led to less longwave radiation back to space, and less convection and fewer clouds over the Pacific leading to increase absorbed solar radiation.

The lapse rate (despite the temperature inversions near the surface at night and in the winter polar regions) insures that the radiation of the air absorbed by the surface is slightly less than the radiation of the surface absorbed by the air.

In the real world, the water vapour transparency window (8µm to 12 µm) may bring some reduction in the radiation of the air absorbed by the surface with respect to the radiation of the surface absorbed by the air; nevertheless F. Miskolczi a from hundreds of profiles (Tiros Initial Guess Retrieval) shown with line by line calculation that it is still true that the radiation of the air absorbed by the surface equals (more or less) the radiation of the surface absorbed by the air; and clouds «close the window» for a quite significant part or the time.

Idea being that the panel with the highest temperature is either absorbing more radiation or emitting less radiation (or some combination of the two) is the best absorber paint candidate?

However, if the model doesn't contain mistakes, at least I have provided more support for Hypothesis C — that the back radiation absorbed in the very surface of the ocean can change the temperature of the ocean below, and demonstrated that Hypothesis B is less likely.

Simply put, soot absorbs solar radiation and all other components reflect it (to a more or lesser degree).

As the transport of radiation outward becomes less efficient, the temperature of the earth's surface must increase to reach a power balance with the absorbed light from the sun.

and the ice can only absorb even less radiation.

The atmosphere of the Earth is less able to absorb shortwave radiation from the Sun than thermal radiation coming from the surface.

-- Yes, it may be correct in so far as they can say that; «around 10 % of the wavebands emitted by IR radiation are made up of wave - lengths that can not be absorbed by «Greenhouse Gases» (GHGs), but that can not possibly mean that 0.04 %, in the case of CO2 concentration but certainly less than 10 % of the Atmosphere as a total has got what must be a «supernatural» ability to stop LWR.

Snow and ice reflect more sunlight than bare ground, meaning less solar radiation is absorbed by the surface.

In contrast, water vapor and carbon dioxide molecules consist of three atoms that are less constrained in their motion, so they absorb the heat radiation.

That happens partly through «new» absorption of radiation that more or less used to escape directly from the surface, as well as absorption and re-emission of radiation that used to get absorbed and re-emitted at lower layers, but now (at higher CO2) does so at higher layers.

The absorption interval of CO2 molecules covers less than 20 percent of the spectrum of thermal radiation of the Earth's surface, while atmospheric moisture absorbs thermal radiation rather uniformly over the entire spectrum.

In the real world, increased concentrations of CO2 would theoretically block a certain proportion of incoming solar insolation so that less solar radiance is absorbed by the ground and oceans, and it would also increase the rate of out going radiation at TOA.

SW radiation, as we stated, is absorbed by the surface and to a lesser extent by water mainly in lower parts of the atmosphere.

So, the 729.9 W / m ^ 2 shown during the hours just before and after noon on a dry clear - sky day should be reading somewhat below 729.9 / (1 — 0.313) or less than 1062 W / m ^ 2 by measurement, near noon, on the equator, for the atmosphere itself, in those conditions, would not be absorbing as much direct solar radiation as the average shows in column C either (no clouds).

So, when the Earth warms, it radiates less longwave radiation in the bands absorbed by CO2 and when it cools, it radiates more longwave radiation in the bands absorbed by CO2?

in the first case, if for some reason the temperature of the Earth drops, it emits less radiation and the temperature tend to recover because the energy that is radiating is less that the energy it is absorbing.