Since each of the infrared - absorbing atmospheric gases has its own unique absorption spectrum, the total infrared absorption
capacity of the atmosphere is then due to the real - time concentration and distribution of all the gases in the atmosphere, from the surface to the stratosphere.
In a warming world the vapour
capacity of the atmosphere increases, and more extreme rainfall, like Texas is witnessing right now, is to be expected as a result.
Since each of the infrared - absorbing atmospheric gases has its own unique absorption spectrum, the total infrared absorption
capacity of the atmosphere is then due to the real - time concentration and distribution of all the gases in the atmosphere, from the surface to the stratosphere.
Re: 121: Methane lifetime is a function of the oxidative
capacity of the atmosphere (namely, hydroxyl radical abundance).
«the oxidative
capacity of the atmosphere has remained constant, a bit of a shock as with the increasing injection of methane and various dirties...» http://rabett.blogspot.com/2011/10/from-ground-up.html
Furthermore, even though evaporation is increasing, it's not increasing as quickly as the water holding
capacity of the atmosphere.
You argue that CO2 should warm the earth rapidly because the heat
capacity of the atmosphere is small.
the adiabatic lapse rate is completely related to two factors, gravity and specific heat
capacity of the atmosphere!
The Solar variation, gravity and the Specific Heat
Capacity of the atmosphere are the ONLY factors that effect the surface temperature profile of Earth and these type of planets!
The only thing for certain in all this is the sea ice is not changing because of changes to the insulating
capacity of the atmosphere from CO2 emissions.
Therefore, the August - Roche - Magnus equation implies that saturation water vapor pressure changes approximately exponentially with temperature under typical atmospheric conditions, and hence the water - holding
capacity of the atmosphere increases by about 7 % for every 1 °C rise in temperature.
Accordingly, changes in temperature and the water holding
capacity of the atmosphere are more robust than changes that depend on winds in any way.
Because the water holding
capacity of the atmosphere increases exponentially with temperature (e.g., Trenberth et al. 2003), a positive anomaly on top of already high SSTs has much greater effect than if located elsewhere.
For starters the heat
capacity of the atmosphere is at least two orders of magnitude below the oceanic mixed layer, which is what CO2 radiative forcing heats.
The hook to this conundrum surfaced a few years ago when two teams of researchers each independently calculated remarkably similar estimates of the maximum safe carbon carrying
capacity of the atmosphere.
However, the chemistry of this process is highly non-linear, and as emissions increase,
the capacity of the atmosphere to deal with the excess methane decreases and the residence time lengthens.
The depth of that layer would depend on the ratio of the insolation times the sol period (day length) to the volumetric heat
capacity of the atmosphere.
I inferred from your statement that since the heat
capacity of the atmosphere is small compared to «say, the oceans» that (a) it [the atmosphere] won't store much energy, and (b) as such won't change the total «heat content» of the Earth, and (c) as such won't change the Earth's temperature.
Then you need the climate model to respond accurately to all these radiative forcings, and by taking full account of the heat
capacity of the atmosphere, land, and ocean, to produce a time trend of the global temperature.
The oceans have 10,000 times the thermal
capacity of the atmosphere.
It would certainly depend somewhat on pressure, because atmospheric density depends on pressure, and the actual heat
capacity of the atmosphere where it picks up heat from the ground would therefore depend on pressure.
According to Hansen and his collaborators, the world has already used up all of the assimilative
capacity of the atmosphere and biosphere that has been available to buffer against dangerous climate change.
Under this view, the world has already used up all of the assimilative
capacity of the atmosphere and biosphere that has been available to buffer against dangerous climate change.
«[T] he CMIP5 [climate model] results instead show an increase in temperature and a much subdued increase in specific humidity, which may be due to GHG - induced warming and subsequent increases in the water vapor holding
capacity of the atmosphere, respectively.
By conservation of energy, and because of the low heat
capacity of the atmosphere, the surface flux tends rapidly (within weeks or months) to match the TOA flux.
Because of the low heat
capacity of the atmosphere, this means that the TOA imbalance must soon match the net surface flux lest the atmosphere becomes extremely hot.
Apologies its was the wrong quote its this one from Abstract of paper above «Volcanic eruption Mass extinction Tipping pointMethane Large volumes of SO2 erupted frequently appear to overdrive the oxidizing
capacity of the atmosphere resulting in very rapid warming.
The grossly inexplicable assumption by the IPCC that the oceans are static considering they constitute 70 % of the surface area of the earth, 1000 times the heat
capacity of the atmosphere and is 10s of thousands of feet deep in contact with the mantle of the earth for which we have virtually NO data to this very day.
Over northern continents in winter, however, more precipitation is associated with higher temperatures, as the water holding
capacity of the atmosphere increases in the warmer conditions.
John: I happened to see today where Trenberth 2010 says that the carrying
capacity of the atmosphere increases by 7 % for every 1 degK increase in temperature.
But the heat
capacity of the atmosphere is so much less than that of the earth, that any warming must be minimal before it all radiates out to space.
The water - holding
capacity of the atmosphere is expected to increase roughly exponentially with temperature rises» (Roo: 2011 p. 26).
The heat
capacity of the atmosphere and earth's surface is so low, that it varies drastically within a few hours every day.
They admit that we had virtually no ocean data that has 1000 times the heat
capacity of the atmosphere and is in direct contact with the atmosphere yet they are willing to make predictions without really any robust data from that variable data at all (pre-2000) and they admitted they didn't understand clouds yet that variable could easily swamp all other effects yet they said with 95 % surety the heating from 1975 - 1998 was caused by CO2 (110 % according to Gavin).
This is caused by the increased moisture
capacity of the atmosphere with increased temperature, as well as warmer oceans, seas, and rivers, which leads to increased evaporation rates.
The capacity of the atmosphere to hold water vapor (saturation specific humidity) increases exponentially with temperature.
My reply: — Global average atmospheric greenhouse - gas optical thickness is the measure of the infrared absorptive
capacity of the atmosphere — that is, of the greenhouse effect.
If the global average infrared absorptive
capacity of the atmosphere is not a useful measure of the greenhouse effect, then what is?
The Ozone and Water Vapor Group conducts research on the nature and causes of the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer and the role of stratospheric and tropospheric ozone and water vapor in forcing climate change and in modifying the chemical cleansing
capacity of the atmosphere.
Since N2 & O2 are by far the most common, they will contribute the bulk of the heat
capacity of the atmosphere.
Not exact matches
An incredible
atmosphere is generated every game with unsurprisingly with a
capacity of over 80,000 people all backing Inter to the hilt.
A record
capacity at the Etihad Stadium thanks to the opening
of the new third tier on the South Stand but did it make a difference to the
atmosphere?
Our goal
of practicing AP is to raise children in a nonviolent
atmosphere and to ensure they will have
capacity for empathy and connection.
This is because such acid reduced the denitrifying microbial
capacity of soils which is responsible for most
of the N2O emissions to the
atmosphere.
Moreover, the blending
of soot and sulfate in the
atmosphere produces new particles that have an even greater
capacity to absorb sunlight.
Those steps include deriving 40 %
of electric power
capacity from fossil fuel — free sources by 2030, reducing its emissions intensity by 33 % to 35 % by 2030, and expanding forests to create a carbon sink capable
of absorbing 2.5 billion to 3 billion tons
of carbon from the
atmosphere.
The most extensive land - based study
of the Amazon to date reveals it is losing its
capacity to absorb carbon from the
atmosphere.
The observed fact that temperatures increases slower over the oceans than over land demonstrates that the large heat
capacity of the ocean tries to hold back the warming
of the air over the ocean and produces a delay at the surface but nevertheless the
atmosphere responds quit rapidly to increasing greenhouse gases.
It has sometimes been argued that the earth's biosphere (in large part, the terrestrial biosphere) may have the
capacity to sequestor much
of the increased carbon dioxide (CO2) in the
atmosphere associated with human fossil fuel burning.
Figure 1 shows the heat
capacity of the land and
atmosphere are small compared to the ocean (the tiny brown sliver
of «land +
atmosphere» also includes the heat absorbed to melt ice).