Sentences with phrase «global heat energy»

Then Hansen - style thermodynamic theory predicts accelerating accumulation of global heat energy.

Evaporation and Condensation as a global heat energy removal system combined with planetary weather systems that involve convection, winds, clouds and precipitation.

We need to look at the evaporative / condensation process combined with ALL aspects of global weather as an ever changing global heat energy removal system and not just as a part of the hydrological cycle as usually set out in models and schematic diagrams.

The behaviour and influence of weather as part of the global heat energy redistribution system is ignored or reduced to meaningless averages because we have so little numerical information about it and I believe that is where our current theories and projections fail.

Not exact matches

But after crunching some Department of Energy data, Surace estimates that the construction and operation of buildings — heating; cooling; lighting; the manufacture of cement, drywall, and glass — produce 52 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

High demand for diesel and home heating fuel in particular means refineries are willing to pay more for crude oil, said Tom Kloza, global head of energy analysis at Oil Price Information Service.

Increased natural gas energy efficiency = Reduced utility bills = Profit Increased natural gas energy efficiency = Reduced global warming Increased natural gas energy efficiency = Reduced CO2 emissions Increased natural gas energy efficiency = Water conservation The technology to make the above possible is called Condensing Flue Gas Heat Recovery.

This tidal energy produces more than enough internal heat to create a global water ocean, possibly as thick in places as 50 kilometers, buried under an outer layer of ice a few kilometers thick.

«If the winds continue to increase as a result of global warming, then we will continue to see increased energy in eddies and jets that will have significant implications for the ability of the Southern Ocean to store carbon dioxide and heat,» said Dr Hogg.

These conflicts have stalled some high - profile projects despite the fact that renewable energy sources do not produce heat - trapping emissions of carbon dioxides, the primary greenhouse gas driving global warming.

«Managing and treating food waste is a global challenge, particularly for cold countries like Canada where the temperature often falls below -20 °C and energy demands related to heating are high.»

«Our analysis confirmed that the Planck Response plays a dominant role in restoring global temperature stability, but to our surprise we found that it tends to be overwhelmed locally by heat - trapping positive energy feedbacks related to changes in clouds, water vapor, and snow and ice,» Brown said.

Using global climate models and NASA satellite observations of Earth's energy budget from the last 15 years, the study finds that a warming Earth is able to restore its temperature equilibrium through complex and seemingly paradoxical changes in the atmosphere and the way radiative heat is transported.

Critics argue that albedo modification and other «geoengineering» schemes are risky and would discourage nations from trying to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide, the heat - trapping gas that comes from the burning of fossil fuels and that is causing global warming by absorbing increasing amounts of energy from sunlight.

What scientists discovered in 2014 is that since the turn of the century, oceans have been absorbing more of global warming's heat and energy than would normally be expected, helping to slow rates of warming on land.

For as much as atmospheric temperatures are rising, the amount of energy being absorbed by the planet is even more striking when one looks into the deep oceans and the change in the global heat content (Figure 4).

Global warming is the result of a greenhouse gas - caused imbalance between incoming solar energy and heat that the Earth radiates away to space.

This may sound sound small, but it's rather substantial when compared to Earth's energy imbalance - that is: the difference between energy (heat) entering and leaving Earth's atmosphere - the global warming - caused imbalance.

Over two dozen lawmakers who favored efforts to clamp down on heat - trapping emissions were swept away on Tuesday's anti-incumbent wave, ushering in a new class of Republicans who doubt global warming science and want to upend President Barack Obama's environmental and energy policies.

Built surfaces increase energy demand and heat - island effects, adversely impact air quality, and produce greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming.

Even if ultimately there is real confidence in ocean heat content data — i.e. the trends exceed the differences in data handling — without understanding changes in reflected SW and emitted IR it remains impossible to understand the global energy dynamic.

By analogy, a warmer world wouldn't be rainier (or cloudier); it's an imperfect analogy, because rain isn't absolutely correlated with cloudiness, and lateral transport of energy by ocean, air, and latent heat currents in and out of the E & W Pacific Ocean areas won't scale to global warming

But every billion - dollar carbon - capture project, in the meantime, is raiding money that might otherwise go into basic research and development aimed at advancing solar technology or large - scale energy storage or other fields where breakthroughs could help lay the groundwork for a post-fossil global energy system — instead of providing a dicey Band - Aid to keep societies stuck on the coal rung of the heat ladder a while longer.

Atmospheric upward heat convection has the potential of providing carbon free energy while reducing global warming.

Numerous denier arguments involving slight fluctuations in the global distribution of warmer vs cooler sea surface areas as supposed explanations of climate change neglect all the energy that goes into ocean heat content, melting large ice deposits and so forth.

For a long time now climatologists have been tracking the global average air temperature as a measure of planetary climate variability and trends, even though this metric reflects just a tiny fraction of Earth's net energy or heat content.

The point about heating (adding energy) vs warming (temperatures going up) is a very good one — it might help if the scientists involved with the major temperature series people look at (GISS, RSS, etc) also produced a global surface energy change index that accounted for things like melting ice, which absorb heat without raising temperatures.

-LSB-...] DENIAL CLAIM # 11: Cosmic rays (very high energy particles) striking the Earth's atmosphere is the cause of global heating (Source: distillation of multiple people's claims at Wikipedia.org).

«The global mean latent heat flux is required to exceed 80 W m — 2 to close the surface energy balance in Figure 2.11, and comes close to the 85 W m — 2 considered as upper limit by Trenberth and Fasullo (2012b) in view of current uncertainties in precipitation retrieval in the Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP, Adler et al., 2012)(the latent heat flux corresponds to the energy equivalent of evaporation, which globally equals precipitation; thus its magnitude may be constrained by global precipitation estimglobal mean latent heat flux is required to exceed 80 W m — 2 to close the surface energy balance in Figure 2.11, and comes close to the 85 W m — 2 considered as upper limit by Trenberth and Fasullo (2012b) in view of current uncertainties in precipitation retrieval in the Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP, Adler et al., 2012)(the latent heat flux corresponds to the energy equivalent of evaporation, which globally equals precipitation; thus its magnitude may be constrained by global precipitation estimGlobal Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP, Adler et al., 2012)(the latent heat flux corresponds to the energy equivalent of evaporation, which globally equals precipitation; thus its magnitude may be constrained by global precipitation estimglobal precipitation estimates).

Another way of looking at this is that the heating of the earth due to global warming is equivalent to the energy in four Hiroshima sized atom bombs exploding every second.

In March 2001, a White House team used a single economic analysis by the Energy Department to build a case that Mr. Bush quickly used to back out of his campaign pledge to restrict power plant discharges of carbon dioxide, the main heat - trapping gas linked to global warming.

BUT Reversing the Atlantic ocean current due to fresh water ice melt, is a local phenomenon, not global AND it does little to reduce the slow steady heat / energy buildup globally — so warming will continue.

Back - of - the - envelope calculations show that the latent heat absorbed by melting of ice after surges (e.g., the melting of > 1500 years of ice accumulation during Dansgaard - Oeschger events — which seem to have happened in unison across the northern hemisphere, or the longer > 5ky Bond cycles) can significantly contribute to the global energy balance.

Global energy consumption is around 104,000 terwatt hours, which means 208,000 terwatt hours are lost as heat.

Of course, if you're serious about stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, achieving the American goal in 2020 is just step one in what would have to be a centurylong 12 - step (or more) program to completely decouple global energy use from processes that generate heat - trapping emissions.

How do you handle the idea of diving into science at the heart of heated, and relentless, tussles over global and national energy and climate policy?

Non-radiative heat fluxes drop to approximately zero (at least for the global time average) going above the tropopause (there is a little leakage of convection through the stratosphere and mesosphere via upward propagation of kinetic energy and the Brewer - Dobson (does that term include the mesospheric part?)

Is less poleward transport of heat by the Gulf Stream as the AMOC weakens a positive feedback for global warming, since that energy will escape more slowly in the humid (higher water vapor GHG effect) tropics than near the poles?

Some energy specialists will explain below why the global coal boom renders the legislative debate on climate somewhat moot from the standpoint of the shared global atmosphere, where the source of emissions is irrelevant to their ultimate heating influence.

Alliance for Climate Education The Altshuller Institute for TRIZ Studies American Geological Institute American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air - Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Apollo Alliance Arizona State University Appalachian State University PSM in Engineering Physics - Instrumentation and Automation Association of American Universities Association of Public and Land - grant Universities Babson College Babson College Energy and Environmental Club Baker College Berkeley Energy Resources Collaborative Binghamton University - State University of New York Bloomsburg University Boston University Energy Club Breakthrough Institute CSTEM Teacher and Student Support Services The California State University California State University - Bakersfield California State University - Channel Islands California State University - Chico California State University - East Bay California State University - Fresno California State University - Fresno PSM Programs in Biotechnology and Water Resources California State University - San Bernardino California State University - Stanislaus California State University - Stanislaus PSM Program in Genetic Counseling Center for Genomic Sciences - Allegheny - Singer Research Institute Clemson University Columbia University Cornell University Council of Graduate Schools Council on Undergraduate Research Duke University EAST Initiative emPOWER, Brown University Student Energy Group Energy Action Coalition Engineers Without Borders - USA Florida Atlantic University Florida State University Focus the Nation Georgia Institute of Technology Global Exchange Harvard College Environmental Action Committee IEEE - USA LearnOnLine, Inc..

The Stephens et al paper is a very incremental change from previous estimates of the global energy balances — chiefly an improvement in latent heat fluxes because of undercounts in the satellite precipitation products and an increase in downward longwave radiation.

First and foremost is I have yet to see a good discussion on how Global Warming effects your observation of a Northward movement of the apparent circulation of the ITCZ heat energy and water vapor distribution.

The EU's binding Renewable Energy Directive targets will make it the second largest growth market after China, as well as remaining the global leader in terms of absolute renewable heat consumption.

It said alternative energy sources, such as wind and solar, could provide nearly 70 % of the world's electricity and 65 % of global heat demand.

Most of the global CO2 emissions issue could be solved with low cost nuclear power (low cost nuclear will replace, over the course of this century, fossil fuels for electricity generation which will then displace gas for heating and produce «energy carriers» to replace fossil fuels for transport fuels).

Anthropogenic GHG warming is about the Earth's energy balance, and thus, looking at an average global near - surface temperature, or the total ocean heat content can tell us something useful about that energy balance.

A new paper by Trenberth et al. (2014) notes that the amount of heat accumulating in the global climate (most of which is absorbed by the oceans) is generally consistent with the observed global energy imbalance.

The variation of net global sensible and latent heat flux from the ocean, being impacted greatly by ENSO, the PDO, and the AMO, plays the dominant role in the fluctuations in total energy output measured at the TOA over short - term time frames.

The total energy reduction of the atmosphere (potential and heat) is equal to the energy transferred to the surface as a result of global warming.

If as I suggest one includes the much denser oceans as a component of atmosphere then increases in CO2 become irredeemably trivial in terms of their power to alter overall density and the speed of energy throughput and thus the global heat retaining process.