Sentences with phrase «absorption by»

Absorption by corporate entities is an acquisitions game.

Break out of this self - absorption by leading an effort to help people learn from each other.

But the pay - off can be great, and the alternatives may be attrition and ultimately absorption by another firm.

These would seem to show a much larger absorption by CO2 when water vapor is the largest effect in most other areas on the surface especially since the poles have a lot less energy to radiate.

However, much less than 30 % of that reaches the surface and is available for surface heating because of scattering and absorption by the atmosphere and scattering by clouds; it is probably even lower for the oceans because of equatorial cloudiness and plankton using light for photosynthesis instead of it resulting in heating of the water.

3a) Absorption by components Please look at the following picture showing the absorption from CO2 and H2O, as well as other constituents.

Power per square meter (flux) entering towards the surface after absorption by the atmosphere = 1013 W / m ^ 2 / 1.20 = 844 W / m ^ 2

Absorption by an object is simply a function of ε.

On the contrary they explicitly measure the absorption by oxygen, just in that region of the spectrum where you said it was a wild - assed guess.

Oslo — Even the longer solar wavelengths are not abosrbed to any extent by CO2, although there is modest absorption by water.

the absorption by H2O is already 100 %, so unless (again) there is a claim that the increased H2O is increasing the depth of the atmosphere, the means by which this insulating layer is becoming more effective escapes me.

Updates in Trenberth et al. (2009) included revised absorption in the atmosphere by water vapor and aerosols, since Kim and Ramanathan (2008) found that updated spectroscopic parameters and continuum absorption for water vapor increased the absorption by 4 — 6 W m − 2.

Arthur says this: «Observed parameters for Earth prove that without infrared absorption by the atmosphere, the average temperature of Earth's surface would be at least 33 K lower than what is observed.»

However at 3, 4, 5 - 8 amd 14 - 18 micron the absorption by water and CO2 blocks the direct radiation into space.

You can ask Jennifer for my email address or I could send it via her (if she also want a copy) Heat transfer from the surface only by convection fits in with Nasif's, Wayne's and my observation that the radiant heat absorption by CO2 is insignificant.

There are a few finer points we need to take into account in order to relate this experiment to the absorption by CO2 in the actual atmosphere.

1950s: Research on military applications of radar and infrared radiation promotes advances in radiative transfer theory and measurements = > Radiation math — Studies conducted largely for military applications give accurate values of infrared absorption by gases = > CO2 greenhouse — Nuclear physicists and chemists develop Carbon - 14 analysis, useful for dating ancient climate changes = > Carbon dates, for detecting carbon from fossil fuels in the atmosphere, and for measuring the rate of ocean turnover = > CO2 greenhouse — Development of digital computers affects many fields including the calculation of radiation transfer in the atmosphere = > Radiation math, and makes it possible to model weather processes = > Models (GCMs)-- Geological studies of polar wandering help provoke Ewing - Donn model of ice ages = > Simple models — Improvements in infrared instrumentation (mainly for industrial processes) allow very precise measurements of atmospheric CO2 = > CO2 greenhouse.

1958 would prove to be a pivotal year in several ways: Guy retired from the Ministry of Supply; the International Geophysical Year reached the culmination of its intensive investigations into Earth systems generally; and two Swedish scientists, Bolin and Eriksson, published an article which definitively clarified aspects of CO2 absorption by the world's oceans.

Callendar then examines the absorption of infrared radiation by water vapor and carbon dioxide, and — using the advances in spectrography since Arrhenius» day — shows absorption by both to be significant.

An increase of carbon dioxide will lower the mean radiation focus, and because the temperature is higher near the surface the radiation is increased, without allowing for any increased absorption by a greater total thickness of the gas.

What is more, in the small print describing the assumptions of the «representative concentration pathways», it admits that the top of the range will only be reached if sensitivity to carbon dioxide is high (which is doubtful); if world population growth re-accelerates (which is unlikely); if carbon dioxide absorption by the oceans slows down (which is improbable); and if the world economy goes in a very odd direction, giving up gas but increasing coal use tenfold (which is implausible).

It is also possible that, even at pre-industrial concentrations of atmospheric CO2, we were already above the «saturation point» of IR absorption by CO2, and therefore, even the warming that has occurred in the last 150 years could not have been caused by carbon dioxide.

atmospheric absorption by CO2 and water vapor increases, reducing the solar heating at the surface, and surface evaporation increases faster with temperature than the transfer of sensible heat (due to the Clausius - Clapeyron relation), both of which tend to reduce the diurnal cycle.

Jacobson, M. Z. Effects of absorption by soot inclusions within clouds and precipitation on global climate.

Emissivity and absorptivity Gray body L metres 10 1000 2000 3600 Nominal gas temp deg C «C4» 20 20 20 20 Emissive power entire spectrum 119.8 119.8 119.8 119.8 Btu / hft ^ 2 Absorption by CO2 of land IR L m 4.9 20.1 23.6 24.4 Btu / hft ^ 2 Total absorbable energy in bands 24.4 24.4 24.4 24.4 Btu / hft ^ 2 Energy absorbed by gas 4.9 20.1 23.6 24.4 Btu / hft ^ 2 Energy remaining after L m 19.5 4.2 0.8 0.0 Btu / hft ^ 2

This range is called «open radiation window», because it is here that the least amount of absorption by water vapour and CO2 takes place

That is, how much warming effect is likely compared to some simple baseline of just taking direct absorption by changing levels of CO2.

Emissivity and absorptivity Gray body L metres 10 100 120 120 Nominal gas temp deg C 20 20 20 20 Emissive power entire spectrum 119.8 119.8 119.8 119.8 Btu / hft ^ 2 Absorption by H2O of land IR L m 39.9 75.9 76.3 76.3 Btu / hft ^ 2 Total absorbable energy in bands 76.4 76.4 76.4 76.4 Btu / hft ^ 2 Energy absorbed by gas 39.9 75.9 76.3 76.3 Btu / hft ^ 2 Energy remaining after L m 36.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 Btu / hft ^ 2

I use spreadsheets to calculate Earth IR emissions and absorption by CO2.

After 60 % absorption by vegetation, soils and the oceans, this means about 1500 Gt CO2 increase in atmosphere, which is 1500 billion tonnes, way above your 400 billion tonnes estimate.

I was just thinking, Arrhenius studied IR absorption by CO2.

After the initial absorption by the CO2 of the longwave radiation from the earth, most of the re-emitted longwave radiation should be emitted upward into space.»

This would require the radiative effect of clouds to change from one that increases atmospheric radiative absorption by about \ (0.5 \, \ hbox -LCB- Wm -RCB- ^ -LCB--2 -RCB- \, \ hbox -LCB- K -RCB- ^ -LCB--1 -RCB- \) to one that decreases it by \ -LRB--3.5 \, \ hbox -LCB- Wm -RCB- ^ -LCB--2 -RCB- \, \ hbox -LCB- K -RCB- ^ -LCB--1 -RCB- \).

It is the result of heat absorption by certain gases in the atmosphere (called greenhouse gases because they effectively «trap» heat in the lower atmosphere) and re-radiation downward of some of that heat.

If you are new to understanding the basics on longwave and shortwave radiation and absorption by trace gases, take a look at CO2 — An Insignificant Trace Gas?

The photoacoustic soot spectrometer (PASS) measures light absorption by aerosol particles.

My own view remains that we need to explore further the role of carbon isotopes in energy absorption by CO2.

In your model, the orange cell (long - wave absorption by GHGs) is set to 95 %, what levels do we set it at for changing GHG levels.

But a key issue is whether, in net climate terms, the loss of (some) biomass for direct conversion to energy is balanced by the gain from CO2 entrapment and extra CO2 absorption by more fertile soils — especially if the combustion route also used geo - sequestration i.e. CCS?

Actually, with no albedo (or absorption by the atmosphere), the amount of solar radiation absorbed by the earth would be ~ 342 W / m ^ 2.

[19] The airborne carbon stock is about 850 Gt - C (2014) and the absorption by ocean and vegetation is 170 Gt - C / year.

The compartments inside the ocean and in the soil can then be manipulated at will to recover k (t) and T0 and the delta13C steps at the times of the El Nino but the many assumptions to be made cast a strong doubt on such modelling; note than between IPCC's AR4 and AR5 the difference between preindustrial flows between compartments and todays assumed flows has been changed very significantly (from 2 to 14 Gt - C for the absorption by the plants) and the air - ocean exchanges reduced by 10 Gt - C!

92.2 Gt - C = 70 (preindustrial) +22.2 Gt - C to 80 Gt - C = 60 (preindustrial) +20 Gt - C while the absorption by terrestrial vegetation went up from 122.6 Gt - C = 120 (preindustrial) + 2.6 Gt - C to 123 Gt - C = 108.9 (preindustrial) + 14.1 Gt - C; the change from 2.6 to 14.1 reflects a reassessment of the fertilization by the additional CO2 in the air since the 277 ppm assumed for the «preindustrial», but is still a factor 2 or 3 lower than the observations between 1960 and 2010 related by the papers of Graven & Keeling, Myneni, Donohue, Pretzsch, Hansen and Sun referenced at the end of card n ° 1 (footnote 19).

The solar heating of the surface is mostly carried away by evaporation, with some convection and some radiation arriving to the cosmos after escaping absorption by water vapor and clouds, for a global average of about 20 W / m ².

2 * the radiation from the surface that has escaped absorption by water vapor, clouds and CO2 (global average 20 W / m ²),

This textbook spends only a short paragraph (page 417) on the greenhouse effect: «the absorption by the air [of the radiation of the surface] and the reemission by a cooler layer allows keeping a surface temperature of 288 K.

A recent article (2011) written by Dufresne & Treiner [8] is titled «the greenhouse effect is more subtle than generally believed ``; it states that the model of the greenhouse glass panel is «doubly inexact and wrong» and that the absorption by CO2 is saturated.

You don't know, how convection limits the actual lapse rate growing larger than the adiabatic lapse rate, when the added absorption by more CO2 tries to change the lapse rate to that direction.

They assume a basis for all this, the radiative heat absorption by CO2 (this is in their founding documents), and produce massive summaries, generally including long term ordinary linear regression in approriately applied to a time series, and then make a statement such as «an increase of.2 deg C / decade».

I don't think proper context is provided for example when human carbon dioxide emissions are compared with natural exchanges (such as absorption by plants and respiration by animals).