Sentences with phrase «higher albedo from»

But the «total power the earth receives from the sun» would still be less, if the higher albedo from a increased area polar icecap were taken into account.

The famous «255 K» value for no greenhouse effect on Earth is an example of this, although in reality if we got that cold you would expect a snowball - like Earth and a much higher albedo from the increased brightness of the surface... and thus the «no - greenhouse temperature» would be even colder than 255 K.

Most of it doesn't come out again, at least not as visible light (water isn't like a cloud, with a high albedo from multiple elastic scattering).

Not exact matches

[1] CO2 absorbs IR, is the main GHG, human emissions are increasing its concentration in the atmosphere, raising temperatures globally; the second GHG, water vapor, exists in equilibrium with water / ice, would precipitate out if not for the CO2, so acts as a feedback; since the oceans cover so much of the planet, water is a large positive feedback; melting snow and ice as the atmosphere warms decreases albedo, another positive feedback, biased toward the poles, which gives larger polar warming than the global average; decreasing the temperature gradient from the equator to the poles is reducing the driving forces for the jetstream; the jetstream's meanders are increasing in amplitude and slowing, just like the lower Missippi River where its driving gradient decreases; the larger slower meanders increase the amplitude and duration of blocking highs, increasing drought and extreme temperatures — and 30,000 + Europeans and 5,000 plus Russians die, and the US corn crop, Russian wheat crop, and Aussie wildland fire protection fails — or extreme rainfall floods the US, France, Pakistan, Thailand (driving up prices for disk drives — hows that for unexpected adverse impacts from AGW?)

Venus has a much higher albedo (reflectivity) than Earth because of its thick cloud cover (and would even have a high albedo without the clouds due to Rayleigh scattering from the dense CO2 atmosphere).

Ice has a much higher albedo than open water, so it reflects more energy from the sun back into space.

Would the much lower albedo result in higher temperatures over a broad enough region to accelerate the crossing of other «tipping points» elsewhere, such as the release of large quantities of methane / CO2 from Siberian peat?

18.4wm - 2 higher assuming the same albedo means a radiative forcing of 3.23wm - 2, which is almost the forcing you get from doubling of CO2 or increasing solar output by 2 %.

Near the poles the albedo is always high, from a combination of low sun angle and the dependency of albedo on that low grazing angle.

So, the scientific thread of albedo prediction from optical depth, Van de Hulst, Sagan and Pollack [Venusian runaway global warming], Lacis and Hansen is wrong., the crutch for the high CO2 - AGW hypothesis is taken away, CO2 probably loses AGW monopoly via «polluted cloud heating».

However, I am not a «warmista» by any means — we do not know how to properly quantify the albedo of aerosols, including clouds, with their consequent negative feedback effects in any of the climate sensitivity models as yet — and all models in the ensemble used by the «warmistas» are indicating the sensitivities (to atmospheric CO2 increase) are too high, by factors ranging from 2 to 4: which could indicate that climate sensitivity to a doubling of current CO2 concentrations will be of the order of 1 degree C or less outside the equatorial regions (none or very little in the equatorial regions)- i.e. an outcome which will likely be beneficial to all of us.

The cryosphere derives its importance to the climate system from a variety of effects, including its high reflectivity (albedo) for solar radiation, its low thermal conductivity, its large thermal inertia, its potential for affecting ocean circulation (through exchange of freshwater and heat) and atmospheric circulation (through topographic changes), its large potential for affecting sea level (through growth and melt of land ice), and its potential for affecting greenhouse gases (through changes in permafrost)(Chapter 4).

I'll go out on a limb and speculate that cosmic rays might alter the vertical distribution of water droplets and shift cloud cover from high to low level while keeping shortwave albedo the same.

After a weeklong delay in data availability from a 61st satellite maneuver in 13 years to makeup low earth orbit drag, we find Greenland ice reflectivity (a.k.a. albedo) returning toward higher values, evidence of fresh snowfall accumulation and accompanying lower temperatures now as the melt season approaches its end.

So the Earthshine project first reveals the global high albedo of the more equatorward jets from the 1960s when the sun was less active during cycle 20 (although cycle 20 was still high in historical terms) and there was some tropospheric cooling.

In reality the high albedo is from a second optical process and the high temperature is from gravity vila lapse rate.

A slight change of ocean temperature (after a delay caused by the high specific heat of water, the annual mixing of thermocline waters with deeper waters in storms) ensures that rising CO2 reduces infrared absorbing H2O vapour while slightly increasing cloud cover (thus Earth's albedo), as evidenced by the fact that the NOAA data from 1948 - 2008 shows a fall in global humidity (not the positive feedback rise presumed by NASA's models!)

Apart from albedo the extra 45 W / m2 over high latitude (ice / snow free) landmass in summer would have a considerable effect in warming the climate.

GMT drops initially at glacial inception in response to decreased summer radiation at high northern latitudes that would have led to equatorward extension of sea ice and snow cover with associated cooling from increased albedo.

The remaining slow drift to lower GMT and pCO2 over glacial time, punctuated by higher - frequency variability and the dust − climate feedbacks, may reflect the consequences of the growth of continental ice sheets via albedo increases (also from vegetation changes) and increased CO2 dissolution in the ocean from cooling.

The fact of the matter is that IPCC has relied in AR4 on models, which assume a strongly positive net feedback from clouds, while subsequent physical observations show that the primary impact of clouds with warming is increased albedo and higher SW reflection resulting in an overall negative cloud feedback.

It's albedo change from increased autumnal snow cover at high northern latitudes.

However, the effect of waves depends on the wind, and the net result fro measured results for clear days very closely approximates the reflection of P polarized light from smooth water at high sun angles: the «classic» water albedo of 0.06 is a good approximation between 90 degrees and 25 degrees solar angles.

Snow - covered surfaces have a high albedo, the surface albedo of soils ranges from high to low, and vegetation - covered surfaces and oceans have a low albedo.

Indeed, it is physically impossible from usual known radiative processes for any opaque body to have a surface albedo (reflectivity) as high as 0.30 yet have an emissivity of 1.

Earthshine may have an overweight from equatorial albedo changes and may have less influence from albedo changes at higher latitudes (e.g. reflection from cloud - free ocean parts).

During periods of high solar activity (last several cycles had anomalously large sunspot numbers), the solar wind deflects more of these high - energy cosmic rays away from Earth, thereby reducing nucleation / cloud cover and increasing albedo.

As with warming, we would expect higher latitudes to be more sensitive to cooling due to the ice albedo feedback, which in this case is from growing ice coverage, so this makes sense to me.