Sentences with phrase «as water vapor becomes»

But as water vapor becomes present in the atmosphere, ozone levels drop.

Not exact matches

Rather, when the fullness of time is reached, there is a qualitative transformation, as in the case of the acorn becoming an oak, or water brought to boiling point becoming vapor, or instinct becoming reflection, or molecular increase becoming cellular.

This effect makes the atmosphere act somewhat like a blanket that becomes thicker when amounts of water vapor, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, such as methane and nitrous oxide, increase.

Simultaneously, as the average liquid droplet becomes smaller through evaporation, the vapor's density increases, so more vapor molecules merge at a faster rate to become microscopic liquid droplets, and more water molecules are ionized.

• Clouds form because cold air doesn't hold as much water as warm air • Clouds are made of water vapor • Clouds always predict rain • Rain falls when clouds become too heavy and the rain drips out or bursts the cloud open • Rain comes from holes in clouds, sweating clouds, funnels in clouds, melted clouds • Lightning never strikes the same place twice • Thunder occurs when two clouds collide • Clouds block wind and slow it down • Clouds come from somewhere above the sky • Clouds are made of smoke How does the 5E model facilitate learning?

(PS regarding Venus — as I have understood it, a runaway water vapor feedback would have occured when solar heating increasing to become greater than a limiting OLR value (Simpson - Kombayashi - Ingersoll limit — see http://chriscolose.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/climate-feedbacks-part-1/ — although I should add that at more «moderate» temperatures (warmer than today), stratospheric H2O increases to a point where H escape to space becomes a significant H2O sink — if that stage worked fast enough relative to solar brightening, a runaway H2O case could be prevented, and it would be a dry (er) heat.

I may have become «Old School,» but back in the 70's water vapor was described (canonically) as a «Greenhouse Gas.»

Physically, the Stefan - Boltzmann feedback becomes more negative and the water vapor feedback becomes less positive as the temperature increases.»

As the water vapor percentage drops, CO2 impact becomes significant.

A thunderstorm event might be best depicted as a run - away rising column of air that is becoming progressively warmer than the surrounding air as condensing water vapor yields its heat of vaporization until almost all water vapor has condensed out and then cooling at a rate of 9.8 deg C per 1000 meters, it eventually reaches a warmer layer of air and spreads out like smoke over a ceiling.

Without a strong positive feedback from water vapor (as assumed in the models), Human - made climate forcing becomes insignificant.

It is becoming apparent that the warming of clouds that is used as a point to prove «back - radiation» from water vapor is not from water vapor (single water molecules) but instead is from the micro-droplets within the clouds which then act as gray bodies when radiating, spreading the energy into all IR bands.

You are probably also aware already that water vapor is as much if not more of a so called greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide is and there is a lot of evaporating ocean water on the planet not to mention clouds and high tropical humidity because hot air provides added space in the atmosphere for water vapor gas to become a major component of air.

This heat - trapping, warming influence of the blanket of air over the Earth's surface is called the greenhouse effect, and it will become even stronger as greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and water vapor increase in concentration.

Strangely, as Solomon et al. clearly are not aware that the sun does not shine at night, whereas the opacity (OPQ, a term unknown to the IPCC) of the sky becomes relevant, if we replace AVGLO by OPQ, then we have these results, that OPQ has a larger role than [CO2], but without being statistically significant, whereas the main player as before is the ESRL's «precipitable water», i.e., atmospheric water vapor, denoted here as [H2O], hugely statistically significant (t stat = 3.39, well above the benchmark 2.0).

And, as is explained, as you go up in the troposphere water vapor concentration rapidly decreases and so CO2 becomes more important.

As for the part about a large amount of water vapor being available, this too is part and parcel with global warming — and is in fact an often overlooked factor in the type of extreme weather and changes that become more likely as the planet as a whole warmAs for the part about a large amount of water vapor being available, this too is part and parcel with global warming — and is in fact an often overlooked factor in the type of extreme weather and changes that become more likely as the planet as a whole warmas the planet as a whole warmas a whole warms.

The only sense in which your argument for a negative water cycle feedback makes much sense is if you are grouping together cloud and water vapor effects in such a feedback (which I guess is not unreasonable when you refer to it as «water cycle» but becomes confusing when you refer to it as «water vapor feedback»).

In light of trends showing a likely 3 °C or more global temperature rise by the end of this century (a figure that could become much higher if all feedback processes, such as changes of sea ice and water vapor, are taken into account) that could result in sea level rises ranging from 20 to 59 cm (again a conservative estimation), Hansen believes it is critical for scientists in the field to speak out about the consequences and rebuke the spin offered by pundits who «have denigrated suggestions that business - as - usual greenhouse gas emissions may cause a sea level rise of the order of meters.»