Sentences with phrase «less land surface»

The new techniques impact far less land surface, use and recycle brackish water, and emit fewer air pollutants and (plant - fertilizing) carbon dioxide every year.

Not exact matches

Less than seven years after Kennedy's speech, on July 20th 1969, the crew of Apollo 11 landed the Eagle module on the lunar surface — and humankind took its famed giant leap forward into interplanetary exploration.

On 19 October, it seemed to drop out of the sky and crash to the surface less than a minute before its planned soft landing.

Because asteroids» gravity is so weak, landing on one takes less energy than reaching the surface of the moon or Mars.

For example, a study by Vasilis Fthenakis and Hung Chul Kim of Columbia University (2009) found that, on a life - cycle electricity - output basis — including direct and indirect land transformation — utility - scale PV in the U.S. Southwest requires less land than the average U.S. power plant using surface - mined coal.

Less than two years after placing the 1 - ton Curiosity rover gently on the Martian surface, NASA is already dreaming up ways to land even bigger spacecraft on the Red Planet.

If these polar continents lose a mile or more of ice from their land surface, there will be less mass, and so some of the water now attracted to those polar land masses will dissipate, and go elsewhere.

The accelerating melting of land ice into the sea makes the surface of the ocean around Antarctica colder, less salty and more easily frozen, leading to extensive sea ice in some areas.

There are some various proposed mechanisms to explain this that involve the surface energy balance (e.g., less coupling between the ground temperature and lower air temperature over land because of less potential for evaporation), and also lapse rate differences over ocean and land (see Joshi et al 2008, Climate Dynamics), as well as vegetation or cloud changes.

Slower plant growth means the land surface takes up less CO2 from the atmosphere.

In terms of the gold that a climate science denier might find in the paper, at the very least, they could argue that the fact that the troposphere isn't warming more quickly than the surface shows that the climate models are unreliable — even though the models predict just the pattern of warming that we see — with the troposphere warming more quickly than the surface over the ocean but less quickly than the surface over land.

The world's wetlands too — often at risk from human exploitation — cover less than 6 % of the planet's land surface, but they hold the most carbon per hectare.

Vast areas of the land surface have little or no current data and even less historic data.

But land is less than a third of the earth's surface and is not the primary habitat.

So perhaps less than 1 m / s over ocean and so some number closer to 10 m / s occurs over smaller the surface area of land.

I go one step further and say even 1.1 C is the theoretical maximum over dry land and where there's water available to evaporate sensitivity at the surface where we live and breathe is much less.

However, the fact that trees are generally darker than most other land coverings means that forested parts of the Earth's surface reflect away less incoming solar radiation, giving forests a warming effect.

This can only happen if the land is drying out leading to more sensible and less latent heat flux at the surface.

They covered the same land area» less than 30 % of the Earth?s surface» housing recording stations that are poorly distributed, mainly in the US and Western Europe.

Even in the absence of such an index, I believe it's well established that tree / plant area has increased in the last 30 years or so, in which case land use forcing (or at least the albedo part) would have been getting less negative for the period, adding to the warming trend; and that's without counting asphalt which obviously has greater sunlight absorption than the average land it replaces (and asphalt - covered surface has kept growing throughout this period).

If heating at the surface is dangerous to societies and ecosystems and land ice and SLR and so on and so on then instinctively it seems that deep in the ocean is a less worrying place for it.

The global SST show mostly similar trends to those of the land - surface air temperature until 1976, but the trend since 1976 is markedly less (Table 2.1).

The land surface temperatures vary a lot more because air is less dense than water and lots of the air where the land surface temperatures are measured is less dense than sea level air.

to be used for drinking water Less evaporation from the storage reservoir Little loss of land No damage due to dam failure Pollutants such as mosquitoes and snails can not exist in the reservoirs Siltation does not create any problems Less vulnerable / below the ground surface in a shallow soil toward the impervious crystalline sub soil.

USHCN adjustments only apply to, in NASA's phrase, «less than 6 % of the earth's land surface».

Since common building materials like asphalt, steel, concrete, and brick retain more heat than vegetation, land development elevates surface and, to a lesser degree, air temperatures.

If this is the best such land area surface temperature assessment system on the planet (covering, as well, a broad range of metropolitan, suburban, and rural areas), and the quality of the system is now proven to be demonstrably more prone to error than had been previously assumed — with the preponderance of error shown to produce the impression of warming in excess of real conditions prevailing — what may be reliably inferred about surface temperature monitoring systems data from even less reliable thermometers all over the rest of the world?

I would rate «Average Earth Land - Sea Surface Temperature» (even on any given day, no less a century long time series) a serious «We don't know to any degree of usable accuracy.»

Statistics show this (from that first abstract) «This hot extreme, which covered much less than 1 % of Earth's surface during the base period, now typically covers about 10 % of the land area.

Satellite readings respond quickly to ENSO episodes while the surface response both lags and is spread over a longer period, and is therefore generally less extreme (this is because the surface is moderated by oceans and land masses which the LT atmosphere is not).

However it should be noted that satellite - based estimates of temperature are a less appropriate measure of land surface temperature than those derived from ground - based stations.

The greenhouse effect means that heat gets from the surface (land or ocean) less efficiently.

Forests now cover about 40 million sq km — just less than one - third of the Earth's land surface.

Their planet had «land» surface at high latitudes and was confined to less than one - third of the globe.

Wetlands are less extensive than agricultural or forest lands, covering 0.7 - 0.9 billion hectares or 4 % -6 % of the land surface of the Earth, but they hold the most carbon per acre and offer 14 % of potential cost - effective natural climate solutions.

While the ocean surface typically warms up by less than 2C, land temperatures are consistently more than 2C — and beyond 5C in the Arctic.

Since annual land surface temperatures are on average less than sea surface temperatures, the temperature difference between land and ocean is decreasing, not increasing, but don't let the facts get in the way of your evaluation.