Sentences with phrase «ocean and he atmosphere above»

I then applied a 1 watt / sq meter forcing to a 10 meter thick slab of ocean and he atmosphere above to get a warming of 0.6 C per year.

The critical thing, however is that this heat engine depends on the temperature differential between the surface of the ocean and the atmosphere above to provide the vertical convective loop.

Plotted are the absolute temperatures for the tropical oceans and the atmosphere above the tropical oceans, as of April 2016 (purple columns).

Not exact matches

«For the final flight, we decided to get more time above the atmosphere and went with a non-recovered flight into the Atlantic Ocean on a four - stage rocket.»

That same year a European probe that had traveled with Cassini plunged into the thick, foggy atmosphere of the moon Titan and — together with the mother ship's measurements from above — found evidence of an ocean of ammonia and water hidden beneath a stunning landscape of dunes, mountains, and rivers.

«After many decades of attempting to understand how the ocean impacts the atmosphere and clouds above it, it became clear a new approach was needed to investigate the complex ocean - atmosphere system.

From the gravity data we received from the Voyager flybys in 1986 (Uranus) and 1989 (Neptune), and from watching how the Uranian rings move, it appears that the planets are not simple, three - layer objects, with the densest rock in the center, surrounded by ocean with a hydrogen / helium atmosphere above it all.

Field observations of microbes recovered from deep drill cores, deep mines, and the ocean floor, coupled with laboratory investigations, reveal that microbial life can exist at conditions of extreme temperatures (to above 110ºC) and pressures (to > 10,000 atmospheres) previous thought impossible.

Once heated, the ocean surface becomes warmer than the atmosphere above, and because of this heat flows from the warm ocean to the cool atmosphere above.

They reference the hazy atmosphere above and in front of the earth, ocean, and sky.

of anthropogenic CO2 releases that have been taken out of the atmosphere (over and above the amount taken out of the atmosphere that balances the natural additions to the atmosphere), perhaps mainly as a direct biogeochemical feedback (increased CO2 favoring more rapid biological fixation of C, net flux of CO2 into water until equilibrium for the given storage of other involved chemical species in the upper ocean) fairly promptly.

In 2003 he created the image above, illustrating the volume of the world's oceans and atmosphere (if the air were all at sea - level density) by rendering them as spheres sitting next to the Earth instead of spread out over its surface.

Is the rather definitive statement that «The increased activity since 1995 is due to natural fluctuations (and) cycles of hurricane activity driven by the Atlantic Ocean itself along with the atmosphere above it and not enhanced substantially by global warming» at all supportable?

Above the ocean and surface rock there is atmosphere which transparent to radiation.

Thus measuring midst of villages, towns, grass fields or forests yield values which have no bearing with whatever can be measured in the rest of the atmosphere, above 1,000 m and far from sources, like over the oceans and in deserts.

What is concerning is the possibility that rapid global warming could occur faster than many people believe is possible, if global warming due to atmospheric carbon dioxide causes the Earth's atmosphere to warm enough to release enormous deposits of frozen methane (CH4) that are stored in the permafrost above the Arctic Circle and in frozen methane ice, known as methane hydrate, underneath the floors of the oceans throughout the world (see: How Methane Gas Releases Due To Global Warming Could Cause Human Extinction).

This is larger than the above 211 GtC that has accumulated in the atmosphere, but that's accounted for in terms of Le Chatelier's principle, which says that adding a chemical (CO2 in this case) to a system will shift its equilibrium resulting in a certain fraction of the CO2 being taken up by the land and ocean.

It being further agreed that AGW works by warming CO2 and hence the atmosphere, resulting in a slowing of the cooling of the oceans into the atmosphere, we are thus back to point (2) above --

AGW climate scientists seem to ignore that while the earth's surface may be warming, our atmosphere above 10,000 ft. above MSL is a refrigerator that can take water vapor scavenged from the vast oceans on earth (which are also a formidable heat sink), lift it to cold zones in the atmosphere by convective physical processes, chill it (removing vast amounts of heat from the atmosphere) or freeze it, (removing even more vast amounts of heat from the atmosphere) drop it on land and oceans as rain, sleet or snow, moisturizing and cooling the soil, cooling the oceans and building polar ice caps and even more importantly, increasing the albedo of the earth, with a critical negative feedback determining how much of the sun's energy is reflected back into space, changing the moment of inertia of the earth by removing water mass from equatorial latitudes and transporting this water vapor mass to the poles, reducing the earth's spin axis moment of inertia and speeding up its spin rate, etc..

Case in point: you point out how a CENTURY of global warming is borne out in the atmosphere, the cryosphere, the ocean temperature, and in sea level rise ALL YOUR OPPONENT needs to say is that the last 18 years doesn't look like «warming» for the atmosphere above 15,000 feet (which, btw, WHAT atmosphere?)

Algae consume CO2 as carbon source, which enhances CO2 drawdown from the surface ocean and consequently from the atmosphere above.»

Sorry Mike, but as I pointed out above, you're ignoring the fast - equilibrium of Henry's law, which sets a fixed partitioning ratio of 1:50 for how much CO2 resides in the atmosphere and oceans respectively at the current mean surface temperature of 15C.

One example I like was a relatively recent explanation of why the Earth was warming and why the temperatures in winter were lower than average; the reason was apparently that an ocean warmer than the atmosphere above was taking heat out of the atmosphere resulting in cooler winter temperatures.

In summer more sea ice melts, which leads to decreased albedo, a climate feedback that enhances the warming of both the open ocean water and the atmosphere directly above it.

Above and below the thin skin layer, turbulent eddy fluxes enhance heat flux in the ocean and / or atmosphere across the interface.However, the eddy can not transport heat across the ocean surface by itself.The heat balance in the skin layer must be accomplished by molecular processes, hence the thin skin layer.T

A liquid - expansion or platinum - resistance thermometer placed in the atmosphere at elevation 2m (for example) above ocean or land surface measures: — molecular kinetic energy (molecular translational energy, heat) plus — LWR energy plus — molecular vibrational energy of the GHGs (primarily H2O in the gaseous form) because LWR energy and molecular vibrational energy of the GHGs are transmuted to molecular kinetic energy (molecular translational energy, heat) upon impacting upon the molecules of the solid and I understand that there is no transverse electromagnetic radiation inside a solid.

As however it takes longer than before for the sea ice to recover and extend across most of the Arctic Ocean, the lower atmosphere is being warmed by the (partly) open water beneath it — like a take away coffee without a lid emits heat to the air above it.

Since the ocean temperature affects the air above the water and movements of air in the atmosphere contribute to our weather, El Niño can influence weather patterns.

dalyplanet, why do you not think the atmosphere above the ocean warms in response to the surface warming, and the surface itself warms in response to the changing energy balance there?

Every square meter of ocean has a square meter of atmosphere above it and we can expect that they will be in some sort of dynamic equilibrium.

All original human CO2 is gone in about 60 years, while still about 10 % of the original peak in CO2 (100 % caused by humans) is measurable after 160 years... The measured response of the ocean - atmosphere carbon cycle in 1988 at 350 ppmv (60 ppmv above steady state) gives an e-fold decay rate of ~ 55 years: http://www.john-daly.com/carbon.htm» ANSWER: What is to be considered is the simple problem (the equation at the top of this reply) constrained by the four monthly time series (CO2)(t) and its delta13C (t), f anthropic (t) and its delta13C (t).

Global climate change has contributed to the higher sea surface and sub-surface ocean temperatures, a warmer and moister atmosphere above the ocean, higher water levels around the globe, and perhaps more precipitation in storms.»

The atmosphere is bounded by space above and the ocean below.

I said it was a consequence of the fact that the two boundaries of the atmosphere — outer space above us and the ocean below — are an infinite and a near - infinite heat - sink respectively, which helping to keep the atmospheric temperature within a narrow interval.

In the high - emissions scenarios DeConto explored, that means Antarctica will be melting both from above — via a warmer atmosphere — and from below — via warmer oceans.

above: land, atmosphere, and ice heating (red), 0 - 700 meter ocean heat content (OHC) increase (light blue), 700 - 2,000 meter OHC increase (dark blue).

Thus the above implication can't be right, as there is no average of additions, but an average of one addition with two seasonal exchanges (between the atmosphere and the biosphere and between the atmosphere and the oceans surface) and one continuous exchange (with the deep oceans)...

If we solve the differential equations governing heat transfer between atmosphere and oceans and find that heat transfer does in fact occur, in both directions, then we can conclude that the above choices are not mutually exclusive.

In other words, * we can observe the increase of CO2 in atmosphere above the ocean, * CO2 absorbs some part of the outgoing radiation from the surface of the ocean which increases somewhat the temperature of the air * The increasing of temperature causes the (slight) increase of the (already existing) back radiation * This (now increased) back radiation is absorbed by the surface skin layer of the ocean which means that the energy delivered by the back radiation to the surface skin layer is now slightly higher * This additional energy will now be distributed over the channels that are participating in the heat transfer from the absorbing surface skin layer to both the air above the skin layer and the bulk of the ocean.

They find that the different moisture availability over land and ocean leads to different atmospheric temperature lapse rates (latent heat release), which in combination with a well - mixed free (above boundary layer) atmosphere can explain the land — sea contrast.

«The increased activity since 1995 is due to natural fluctuations (and) cycles of hurricane activity driven by the Atlantic Ocean itself along with the atmosphere above it and not enhanced substantially by global warming,» he testified.

Most of what happens in the stratosphere and above [apart from cyclical sunspot effects which go in the same direction — not opposite — everywhere] derives from the big dog [the climate in the oceans and the troposphere] wagging the tiny tail [the 1000 to 1000,000,000,000 times thinner upper atmosphere].

This is the frequently cited extra forcing estimated at the top of the atmosphere (TOA), and this is where some of the assumptions made above don't quite hold (the picture is correct for a planet in equilibrium, but during a transition the planet is no longer in an equilibrium) and extra energy is taken up by warming of the oceans and surface.

After 60 % absorption by vegetation, soils and the oceans, this means about 1500 Gt CO2 increase in atmosphere, which is 1500 billion tonnes, way above your 400 billion tonnes estimate.

Since the ocean surface temperature changes precede surface air temperature changes by several months, and since the top two metres of ocean contain as much heat capacity as the entire atmosphere above it, it is clear that surface temperature and atmospheric temperature is strongly influenced by the ocean, which is heated by the sun, not by back radiation.

Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center in Miami: «The increased activity since 1995 is due to natural fluctuations (and) cycles of hurricane activity driven by the Atlantic Ocean itself along with the atmosphere above it and not enhanced substantially by global warming,» he testified.

If the energy was staying concentrated in the ocean surface layer it would warm that layer faster (no heat leaking out into the lower ocean) and hence the atmosphere above it would warm faster too.

When a full - depth ocean model is used, something intriguing happens: the loss of Arctic sea ice triggers a far - flung response that mimics climate change itself, including a slowdown of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), a build - up of heat in the tropical oceans over several decades, and a warming of the atmosphere a few miles above the tropics.

In the Metzl et al paper for example (your link above), Ocean - atmosphere fluxes differ wildly between models and observations (more than 5 GTc / month, ie 60 Gt / y,) and measurements are made on short periods (less than a decade).

The DWLWIR simply energizes it and powers evaporation taking water vapour upwards and into the atmosphere such that much DWLWIR never reaches the oceans, but instead it is (remains) in the atmosphere above the oceans.