Sentences with phrase «effect of water vapor»

While it was true that the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide had been increasing, he said, and had passed 400 parts per million, the dominant effect of water vapor had helped flatten the greenhouse effect, such that the rise of global surface temperatures had slowed significantly.

Some critics argue that future warming may even dry out he upper atmosphere, tempering the warming effect of water vapor.

That is because the Arrhenius theory is incomplete and leaves out the effect of water vapor in the atmosphere.

There is not «one» simple feedback for the atmosphere the effect of water vapor and convection and albedo from clouds leads to a stabilizing feedback.

Now the 3rd fainter line below the bold line is the effect of water vapor.

``... underestimating the negative feedback from cloud albedo and overestimating the positive feedback from the greenhouse effect of water vapor over the tropical Pacific during ENSO is a prevalent problem of climate models.

Why would the effect of the water vapor dissipate so much with such minimal increases in CO2's share of the atmosphere?

However, the other model simulated a smaller increase of 8 percent, which is close to the unamplified effect of water vapor capacity in warmer air.

What I am trying to work out in my head is the perturbation effect of water vapor.

This isn't an argument about how to evaluate the effect of water vapor — just how to illustrate a point.

Anyway, here are some sites and articles that might help the average reading understand a little more about the effect of water vapor, solar flares, tilt of the earth, etc. (articles are back about 5 to 8 years).

My confusion wasn't helped by your reference to Arrhenius, who removed the effect of water vapor to estimate CO2 forcing.

This is because the net effect of water vapor is less than zero when it comes to warming.

The net effect of the water vapor (more or less heating) is not determinant and may be either positive or negative depending on all the above.

It seems that climate has responded to the increased forcing due to the greenhouse effect of water vapor and CO2 (+ other GHGs) with the result that the solar forcing is reduced to a level so that the 0.75 C / Wm ^ -2 was maintained.

WRT water vapor amplification, I suspect that the basic (radiative only) amplifying effect of water vapor, which is something less than a factor of 2 over the CO2 - only effect of ~ 1.2 C, IIRC, will be close to the same across a range of average surface temperatures.

«By comparing the response of clouds and water vapor to ENSO forcing in nature with that in AMIP simulations by some leading climate models, an earlier evaluation of tropical cloud and water vapor feedbacks has revealed two common biases in the models: (1) an underestimate of the strength of the negative cloud albedo feedback and (2) an overestimate of the positive feedback from the greenhouse effect of water vapor.

Another process knows as a «runaway greenhouse» occurs due to the increased greenhouse effect of water vapor in the lower atmosphere, which further drives evaporation and more warming.

«Water evaporation and condensation processes as well as the strong greenhouse effect of water vapor and clouds decisively influence the energy balance of the atmosphere and the entire planet,» says Matthias Schneider from the KIT Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research (IMK).

But hot water vapor in the atmosphere of brown dwarfs can not be easily seen from Earth's surface, due to the absorbing effects of water vapor in our own atmosphere.

This sensitivity estimate is not the last word on the subject, because of uncertainties in the approximate formulae used to compute the terms in the energy balance, and neglect of possible effects of water vapor feedback on the surface budget.

Convection cells arising from such tomfoolerly only mix the lower troposphere because without the bouyant effects of water vapor, no heat transfer to the stratosphere can occurr.

Then they go on to explain the effects of water vapor and clouds but with the most incredibly shallow and frankly bizarre propaganda style, leaving out the details on what else the water cycle does.

The average listener, not familiar with relative greenhouse effects of water vapor and CO2, would probably think that the first part of the statement «all of the absorption of IR....»

Instruments in space tell us how much OLR through clear skies varies with surface temperature, i.e. the combined effects of water vapor and lapse rate feedback.

Because of the GHG effect, one can't separate the effects of water vapor concentration, which also has an Arrhenius law, aka Clausius - Clapeyron.

Since water vapor is such a powerful greenhouse gas, any increase in temperature in this region of the atmosphere should be largely a result of the effects of water vapor (IPCC Working Group 1 Assessment Report 4, Chapter 3, «Observations: Surface and Atmospheric Climate Change», Figure 3.21, page 275).

Not exact matches

Either one of those aircraft effects can drop the air temperature by more than 35 degrees Fahrenheit, flash - freezing the water vapor.

So this effect could either be the result of natural variability in Earth's climate, or yet another effect of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases like water vapor trapping more heat and thus warming sea - surface temperatures.

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.

The theory of dangerous climate change is based not just on carbon dioxide warming but on positive and negative feedback effects from water vapor and phenomena such as clouds and airborne aerosols from coal burning.

That limits the amount of water evaporated from the oceans and, as a result, the greenhouse effect by water vapor.

The research, published yesterday in Nature Climate Change, outlines a counterintuitive side effect of climate change: As higher temperatures drive plants and trees into areas now inhospitable to them, their new distribution speeds up temperature rise via natural processes such as releases of heat - trapping water vapor into the air.

While plants also absorb carbon from the air, the team found that the warming power of water vapor and the albedo effect in particular far outweigh this cooling factor.

«There's a finite amount of water vapor in the stratosphere,» Dessler says, «so it can't cancel out the effects of CO2 forever.»

I guess I am surprised that with better understanding of the importance of water vapor feedback, sulfate aerosols, black carbon aerosols, more rapid than expected declines in sea ice and attendant decreases in albedo, effects of the deposition of soot and dust on snow and ice decreasing albedo, and a recognition of the importance of GHGs that were probably not considered 30 years ago, that the sensitivity has changed so little over time.

When the CLIMAP data proved to be wrong, and was replaced by more reliable estimates showing a substantial tropical surface temperature drop, Lindzen had to abandon his then - current model and move on to other forms of mischief (first the «cumulus drying» negative water vapor feedback mechanism, since abandoned, and now the «Iris» effect cloud feedback mechanism).

Current state - of - the - art climate models predict that increasing water vapor concentrations in warmer air will amplify the greenhouse effect created by anthropogenic greenhouse gases while maintaining nearly constant relative humidity.

water vapor, which causes about 36 — 70 percent of the greenhouse effect on Earth.

As the temperature rises, water vapor evaporates at a higher rate, raising the water vapor content of the atmosphere, further amplifying the the increased greenhouse effect of the additional carbon dioxide.

... The Earth's atmospheric methane concentration has increased by about 150 % since 1750, and it accounts for 20 % of the total radiative forcing from all of the long - lived and globally mixed greenhouse gases (these gases don't include water vapor which is by far the largest component of the greenhouse effect).

The forcing due to reduced amounts of long lived GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O) was -3 ± 0.5 W / m2, with the indirect effects of CH4 on tropospheric ozone and stratospheric water vapor included (fig.

For starters, one simply can not equate the positive feedback effect of melting ice (both reduced albedo and increased water vapor) from that of leaving maximum ice to that of minimum ice where the climate is now (and is during every interglacial period).

There is a clear impact on global temperature, too, though the mechanisms are complex: heat released from the oceans; increases in water vapor, which enhance the greenhouse effect, and redistributions of clouds.

Greenhouse effect from water vapor is filtered out, showing the contributions of other greenhouse gases (Evans 2006).

However, this climate sensitivity includes only the effects of fast feedbacks of the climate system, such as water vapor, clouds, aerosols, and sea ice.

In addition, since the global surface temperature records are a measure that responds to albedo changes (volcanic aerosols, cloud cover, land use, snow and ice cover) solar output, and differences in partition of various forcings into the oceans / atmosphere / land / cryosphere, teasing out just the effect of CO2 + water vapor over the short term is difficult to impossible.

For example, they predicted the expansion of the Hadley cells, the poleward movement of storm tracks, the rising of the tropopause, the rising of the effective radiating altitude, the circulation of aerosols in the atmosphere, the modelling of the transmission of radiation through the atmosphere, the clear sky super greenhouse effect that results from increased water vapor in the tropics, the near constancy of relative humidity, and polar amplification, the cooling of the stratosphere while the troposphere warmed.

A person who understands the scientific process wouldn't be able to state that water vapor is a greater percentage of the greenhouse effect and think that no climate scientist had thought of this before.

Water vapor amplifies the effect of CO2.