Sentences with phrase «because radiative energy»

Such large LHF increases are generally not realizable, because radiative energy flux changes are needed to evaporate the excess water.

Not exact matches

Because black holes can not be observed directly, Schulze's team instead measured emissions from oxygen ions [O III] around the black hole and accretion disk to determine the radiative efficiency; i.e. how much energy matter releases as it falls into the black hole.

An object too small to be an ordinary star because it can not produce enough energy by fusion in its core to compensate for the radiative energy it loses from its surface.

Because we understand the energy balance of our Earth, we also know that global warming is caused by greenhouse gases — which have caused the largest imbalance in the radiative energy budget over the last century.

That the radiative flux can be measured isn't relevant because only the net energy transfer is relevant.

Because short - term projections depend on unforeseeable factors like volcanoes, solar intensity changes, ENSOs etc., and long - term projections depend on radiative balance and conservation of energy.

«The IPCC has failed to convincingly explain the pause in terms of external radiative forcing from greenhouse gases...» — That's because the tropospheric pause has nothing to do with GH gases, which never «pause» in their action, bit rather, the pause has everything to do with natural variability in the rate of energy flow from ocean to atmosphere.

Hi, You state «The Earth and the atmosphere are warmer because of that [radiative] energy transfer» one - way from the Earth to the atmosphere.

It couldn't be quite as fast as on a planet with no atmosphere because there would also be non radiative energy exchanges between the GHGs and the ground via conduction and convection.

The uncertainty is largest on the regional scale because the horizontal transports of energy (latent heat, sensible heat, geopotential energy) dominate over the radiative transfer of energy.

A change in radiative characteristics alone does not make more energy available because solar insolation at TOA remains the same, mass stays the same and gravity stays the same.

As you say, convection uses up a lot of energy too and also counters the idea of radiative heat transfer as a big ticket item because «hot» CO2 molecules only remain so for a brief fraction of a second before they collide with N2 or O2 to warm that localised parcel of air; which then rises to attain equilibrium T somewhere higher and at a COLDER temp so no rad Transf!!!

Because the temperature is lower at higher altitudes, less energy is emitted, causing a positive radiative forcing.

However there is no law that says radiative transfers have to balance, in fact we know from the law of conservation of energy that this isn't the case: a solar panel has no radiative equilibrium because the incoming radiation is converted into heat.

«Because the solar - thermal energy balance of Earth [at the top of the atmosphere (TOA)-RSB- is maintained by radiative processes only, and because all the global net advective energy transports must equal zero, it follows that the global average surface temperature must be determined in full by the radiative fluxes arising from the patterns of temperature and absorption of radiation.Because the solar - thermal energy balance of Earth [at the top of the atmosphere (TOA)-RSB- is maintained by radiative processes only, and because all the global net advective energy transports must equal zero, it follows that the global average surface temperature must be determined in full by the radiative fluxes arising from the patterns of temperature and absorption of radiation.because all the global net advective energy transports must equal zero, it follows that the global average surface temperature must be determined in full by the radiative fluxes arising from the patterns of temperature and absorption of radiation.»

Greenhouse gases «trap» radiative energy because they absorbed IR radiation from the Earth's surface which then continually «bounces up and down».

Because of their critical role in radiating energy to space and driving convective circulation, radiative gases act to cool our atmosphere at all concentrations above 0.0 ppm.

Because the only way for the earth to cool is by radiative output into space, and because of the present heat content, we have stored energy in the billions of years behBecause the only way for the earth to cool is by radiative output into space, and because of the present heat content, we have stored energy in the billions of years behbecause of the present heat content, we have stored energy in the billions of years behind us.

Thus with GHGs in an atmosphere the circulation can slow down because more of its job of maintaining top of atmosphere energy balance is done for it by those radiative gases.

The greenhouse effect heats the earth because greenhouse gases absorb outgoing radiative energy and re-emit some of it back towards earth.

I get upset when I see «The greenhouse effect heats the earth because greenhouse gases absorb outgoing radiative energy and re-emit some of it back towards earth.»

In other words, a bigger share of the 240 W / m 2 of the vertical energy transport will be transported by convective / advective means with a stronger GHE, and a smaller share by radiative means because the sum of convective vertical energy transport plus the diminished radiative flux must add up to about 240 W / m 2 in order to balance the incoming shortwave radiation.

A lot of confusion seems to lie in not realizing that all the energy entering and leaving at the TOA is radiative, and as a result of this the effect of the non radiative fluxes from the surface (from latent heat of water and thermals) on the radiative budget has to be zero, because COE dictates that the atmosphere can not create any energy of its own.

Temperatures are buffered while the radiative flux soaks «into / out of» latent heat because, loosely speaking, the latency due to phase change alters the energy capacity for the region.

Increasing the resistance of the radiative with GHGs has very muted effect because the lion's share goes right back out the chute as latent energy.

He called it «global» dimming because the technical term for the radiative energy is called «global solar radiation» and it contrasts nicely with the more common «global warming».

Methane has only a miniscule effect in this regard because it is in a very low energy portion of the Earth's radiative spectrum already close to satureation by the effect from water vapour.

A real greenhouse primarily restricts heat escape by preventing convection while the «greenhouse effect» heats the Earth because «greenhouse gases» (GHG) absorb outgoing radiative energy and re-emit some of it back towards Earth.

I was disappointed because I'm sure that GCM models would not use such an idealistic model given that the greenhouse effect is highly dependent upon radiative energy exchange and as a consequence friction is most certainly important.